On Mon, Sep 26, 2005 at 17:40:52 +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On 9/25/05, Yuval Kogman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> I propose a new model - each exception has a continuation that
> >> allows it to be unfatalized.
> >
> > I think we've already talked about something like this. But in the
> > presence of "use fatal", it makes a lot more sense.
> >
> > Something comes to mind:
> >
> > use fatal;
> > sub foo() { bar() }
> > sub bar() { baz() }
> > sub baz() { quux() }
> > sub quux() { fail }
> > {
> > say foo();
> > CATCH { $!.continue(42) }
> > }
> >
> > Exactly which exception is continued?
>
> The bottommost one. If you want to return to somewhere up its call chain, do:
>
> $!.caller(n).continue(42)
This breaks encapsulation, like luqui mentioned.
However, since every exception has an exception stack, i guess you
could see exactly how it was propagated non-fatally, before it was
actually thrown.
> sub open(...) {
> ...
> CATCH { $!.rethrow }
> }
...
> $!.inner
That way behavior like that could be automated
--
() Yuval Kogman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 0xEBD27418 perl hacker &
/\ kung foo master: /me sushi-spin-kicks : neeyah!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
pgpffVTkcoASG.pgp
Description: PGP signature
