[796] in Coldmud discussion meeting
Re: exception handling...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Fri Sep 1 12:49:00 1995
)
From: Chuck Adams <cadams@weather.Brockport.EDU>
To: brandon@smithfield.declab.usu.edu (869683 Gillespie Brandon James)
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 1995 10:44:26 -0600 (MDT)
Cc: coldstuff@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: <9508310725.AA04032@smithfield.declab.usu.edu> from "869683 Gillespie Brandon James" at Aug 31, 95 01:25:08 am
869683 Gillespie Brandon James drew these hieroglyphs:
>
> I'm mulling over the reconstruction of exception handling (catch) to be
> slightly different. The best way to explain this is with an example:
>
> for obj in (list) {
> catch {
> obj.query_test();
> } handle ~locked {
> sender().print("Object is locked.");
> } handle others {
> sender().print("Error: " + toliteral(error) + " encountered!");
> } otherwise {
> sender().print("Test is sucessful for: " + obj.name());
> valid = valid + [obj];
> }
> }
> What does everybody else feel about this?
hmm... puts the successful case at the bottom instead of the top --
one expects the successful case most of the time (that is, success is
the typical case), and doesn't want to skip over a bunch of border
cases to reach the code for the typical case.
Gets a minus for readability IMHO.
Chuck