On Thu, Aug 03, 2000 at 08:54:35PM +0200, Johan Vromans wrote: > Peter Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > If we get a good-looking exception throwing/catching mechanism and > > syntax, this may not matter. > try { > java > } > catch (Exception e) { > think again > } I like this. It's perlish in that it builds off of a well-defined and proven mechanism, and it even *looks* perlish.
- Re: RFC: Modify open() and opendir() to return handles Graham Barr
- Re: RFC: Modify open() and opendir() to return ha... Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC: Modify open() and opendir() to retur... Jonathan Scott Duff
- Re: RFC: Modify open() and opendir() to r... Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC: Modify open() and opendir() ... Graham Barr
- Re: RFC: Modify open() and opend... Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC: Modify open() and opend... Graham Barr
- Re: RFC: Modify open() and opend... Tim Jenness
- Re: RFC: Modify open() and opend... Peter Scott
- Re: RFC: Modify open() and opend... Johan Vromans
- try/catch (Was: Re: RFC: Modify ... Steve Simmons
- try/catch (Was: Re: RFC: Modify ... Johan Vromans
- Re: try/catch (Was: Re: RFC: Mod... Hildo Biersma
- Re: try/catch (Was: Re: RFC: Mod... Johan Vromans
- Re: try/catch (Was: Re: RFC: Mod... Graham Barr
- Re: try/catch (Was: Re: RFC: Mod... Tom Christiansen
- Re: try/catch (Was: Re: RFC: Mod... Graham Barr
- Re: try/catch (Was: Re: RFC: Mod... Nathan Wiger
- Re: try/catch (Was: Re: RFC: Mod... Tom Christiansen
- Re: try/catch (Was: Re: RFC: Mod... Nathan Wiger
- Re: try/catch (Was: Re: RFC: Mod... Tom Christiansen