>
> I agree that error handling is a PITA in functional languages.
Actually, it's not functional languages in general with this problem.
> Unfortunately, your proposal only works one level deep.
> One of the real advantages of "functional" languages is that you nest calls.
>
> (let ((x (f1 (f2
On Wed, 05 Jul 2000, Rob Browning wrote:
> Handling error conditions is a PITA if you want to write in a more
> functional style. One way to handle it is to make it so that #f as a
> return value is always an error, and if there's a real value, then you
> return something like (cons #t value).
Kevin Finn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Would it be reasonable to make this error a run-time crash or a
> popup warning? I'm not sure how you would return an error from a
> bad option lookup, since there could be many different types of
> options and what might be an error condition from one wo
Kevin Finn writes:
> Out of curiosity, what is the query that you would use to determine the gtk
> sensitivity? I've looked at the Gtk+ on-line tutorial, and under "Widget
> Attributes" they listed gtk_set_sensitive, but no get_sensitive. It also
> mentioned that "sensitive" is part of the widg
On Tue, 04 Jul 2000, Dave Peticolas wrote:
> Kevin Finn writes:
> > On Tue, 04 Jul 2000, Dave Peticolas wrote:
> > > Robert Graham Merkel writes:
> > > > Kevin Finn writes:
> > > > >
> > [...]
> > >
> > > Disabling by name would be just fine. Keep in mind, though, that disabling
> > > would mos
Kevin Finn writes:
> On Tue, 04 Jul 2000, Dave Peticolas wrote:
> > Robert Graham Merkel writes:
> > > Kevin Finn writes:
> > > >
> [...]
> >
> > Disabling by name would be just fine. Keep in mind, though, that disabling
> > would most often be done in scheme, or at least the information that o
On Tue, 04 Jul 2000, Dave Peticolas wrote:
> Robert Graham Merkel writes:
> > Kevin Finn writes:
> > >
[...]
>
> Disabling by name would be just fine. Keep in mind, though, that disabling
> would most often be done in scheme, or at least the information that one
> option's sensitivity depends o
Robert Graham Merkel writes:
> Kevin Finn writes:
> >
> > I can take a stab at it - I'm interested in picking up more Gtk+. Do
> es it
> > make more sense for each option to provide access functions that other opt
> ions
> > can use to enable/disable it, or perhaps just have those other
On Mon, 03 Jul 2000, you wrote:
> Kevin Finn writes:
> >
[...]
>
> I think disabling by name would be sufficient - it is consistent with
> the rest of the options interface.
>
> Which brings me to another point - if we make options mutable, should
> it be an error if we try to read a muted op
Kevin Finn writes:
>
> I can take a stab at it - I'm interested in picking up more Gtk+. Does it
> make more sense for each option to provide access functions that other options
> can use to enable/disable it, or perhaps just have those other options
> disable the affected option "by n
I can take a stab at it - I'm interested in picking up more Gtk+. Does it
make more sense for each option to provide access functions that other options
can use to enable/disable it, or perhaps just have those other options
disable the affected option "by name" ("Section" + "Option name", e
Kevin Finn writes:
> Hello,
>
> I'm trying to set up the preferences dialog for auto decimal point so that
> there is a check box to enable/disable the feature and then a range of values
> for how many decimal places will be automatically created. Is there a way to
> grey out or
Hello,
I'm trying to set up the preferences dialog for auto decimal point so that
there is a check box to enable/disable the feature and then a range of values
for how many decimal places will be automatically created. Is there a way to
grey out or disable the range widget when the che
13 matches
Mail list logo
