#, will do the trick.
ExceptionOne, ExceptionTwo
Nesting the #on:do: messages is probably the more correct approach, since
each one would be catching just one family of exceptions and not require
class testing. Unfortunately, nested #on:do: messages are terribly ugly.
Many people (I hate that phra
Rather than ‘Array with:with:’ it probably should be ‘ExceptionSet with:with:’.
> On May 25, 2023, at 9:19 AM, James Foster via Pharo-users
> wrote:
>
> The #’on:do:’ implementation in Block accepts either an Exception or an
> ExceptionSet as the first parameter. So you can do something like t
The #’on:do:’ implementation in Block accepts either an Exception or an
ExceptionSet as the first parameter. So you can do something like the following
(I’m typing from memory without trying so may have syntax errrors):
[ “tryBlock” ] on: (Array with: ExceptionOne with: ExceptionTwo) do: [:ex |
Mole, a model for graphs, both directed and undirected. reached it's v3.4.0 version.
What's Changed
Add Pharo 11 support by @gcotelli in https://github.com/ba-st/Mole/pull/19
Full Changelog: https://github.com/ba-st/Mole/compare/v3.3.0…v3.4.0
Regards,
The Buenos Aires Smalltalk team
Ansible, an AMQP client for Pharo reached it's v2.1.0 version.
What's Changed
Add Pharo 11 support by @gcotelli in https://github.com/ba-st/Ansible/pull/42
Full Changelog: https://github.com/ba-st/Ansible/compare/v2.0.0…v2.1.0
Regards,
The Buenos Aires Smalltalk team
In other languages there is the possibility to chain exception handlers like
this:
`try { doOne(); doTwo(); doThree(); }`
`catch(ExceptionOne ex){`
` handleOne();`
`}`
`catch(ExceptionTwo ex) {`
` handleTwo();`
`}`
`catch(ExceptionThree ex) {`
` handleThree();`
`}`
`catch(Exception e
