>>>>> "TC" == Tom Christiansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
TC> I'm saying that you can't know what to check for, because you don't
TC> know who generated the exception. Can you use your fancy constants?
Then please tell me how anyone has ever coded
$@ =~ /..../
They don't know what to look for? I just want to replace the examination
of the textual error message with a fixed value.
TC> And what is "core"? Compiler? Interpreter? Utilities? Pragmata?
TC> Modules?
Anything that came in the TARBALL, anything that p6p will be responsible
for.
TC> Citing IBM as a reference is enough to drive a lot of us away screaming.
Why?
TC> Try <errno.h> or <sysexits.h> Notice how much nicer this is. Few
TC> values, but usable in varied places.
Sometimes it is acceptable to collapse different errors into one. But
then sometimes losing the direct error makes things difficult to decide
what really happened and how to handle it.
Your issue could be handled by supplying a classification, either
mapping to use warnings, or a different set (or all of them. I
really don't care.)
But the examination of the textual string, locks away any possiblities
of adjusting the text of the message or even making the error string
localizable.
Consider allowing perl to emit error messages in French, Latin, or
Klingon without breaking the code.
<chaim>
--
Chaim Frenkel Nonlinear Knowledge, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] +1-718-236-0183
