I was thinking the parameter could be a handy runtime switch,
defaulting to "safe". However realistically there's probably a lot of
other ground to cover when it comes to "debug" vs. "production"
deployments. Maybe this needs a more comprehensive approach than
nibbling away one switch at a time.
M
Amen
On Tuesday, May 26, 2015, WarGrey Gyoudmon Ju wrote:
> I think user-friendly 500 page should be designed separately just as web
> devs do for 404 page.
> In practice, a user happens to meet an uncaught runtime exception, and
> he's browsing a buggy website,
> perhaps he do not have the will
I think user-friendly 500 page should be designed separately just as web
devs do for 404 page.
In practice, a user happens to meet an uncaught runtime exception, and he's
browsing a buggy website,
perhaps he do not have the will to report the problem, nor the way to
report it.
Finally, devs will fi
For the purposes of the Web server, I don't think that's the right
thing to do. The right thing to do if you don't like the error display
is to change the arguments to #:servlet-loading-responder and
#:servlet-responder to print less, or just put with-handlers in your
servlet and do something else.
On 05/25/2015 11:16 AM, Greg Hendershott wrote:
> Should there maybe be a parameter to control whether exn->string
> returns anything interesting? And, should it be #f by default?
That's an interesting idea. I know of examples where Racket error
reports have disclosed sensitive information. Such m
Maybe I'm over-thinking this and/or misunderstanding the use case, but:
Should there maybe be a parameter to control whether exn->string
returns anything interesting? And, should it be #f by default?
Roughly, for example:
;; When current-exn->string-enabled? is #f -- the default --
;; exn->stri
A new module sounds right to me. I was thinking `racket/exn-to-string`
for just this function, but `racket/exn` sounds fine and maybe better.
At Sun, 24 May 2015 08:01:23 -0400, Jay McCarthy wrote:
> I think it's a good idea. Where to though? A new racket/exn module?
>
> Jay
>
> On Sat, May 23,
I think it's a good idea. Where to though? A new racket/exn module?
Jay
On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 11:48 AM, Tony Garnock-Jones wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I find myself using exn->string from web-server/private/util *a lot* in
> many of my packages. (I just counted eight!)
>
> Should we move it to core R
8 matches
Mail list logo
