[748] in Coldmud discussion meeting

root meeting help first first in chain previous in chain previous next next in chain last in chain last

Re: error_arg,error_str

daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Thu May 25 10:53:20 1995 )

From: brandon@avon.declab.usu.edu
To: coldstuff@MIT.EDU
Date: Thu, 25 May 95 08:47:01 -0600

< Why were these removed?  I mean, error() was kept.  Why should we have
<  to index into traceback() for the rest?  If I just want the error_str(),
<  it seems wasteful to make the server generate an entire traceback().
< Besides, error_str() looks a lot better than traceback()[1][2].

The information is there whether you snag it via traceback()[1][2] or
error_str().  As far as inefficiency goes, I can think of numerous more
inefficient things than that :)

It is a little more clunky, but error_[arg|str]() would just be redundant,
now that traceback() returns intelligent output.

-Brandon Gillespie-