Re: On the case for exception-based error handling.

[Glenn Linderman]

Chaim Frenkel wrote:

> No, that should be the difference between die and throw. Die is
> immediately fatal. (i.e. current semantics) throw is new and does
> the magic.
>
> We get no breakage that way.

Hear, hear.  That's (some of) what RFC 119 proposes.  Keep fatal error handling
and non-fatal error/exception handling separable, using different mechanisms.

RFC 119v3 will contain an expanded section on wrappers that can be used to convert
from one type of error to another, for those cases where that is needed for
compatibility (before code using today's Try.pm and/or Error.pm can be converted),
or for those cases where it really is true that the context of an error alters its
severity (_THIS_ fatal error, in _THIS_ circumstance, should be treated as
non-fatal, or vice-versa).

--
Glenn
=====
There  are two kinds of people, those
who finish  what they start,  and  so
on...                 -- Robert Byrne


_______________________________________________
Why pay for something you could get for free?
NetZero provides FREE Internet Access and Email
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html