[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

# Re: listen()

- Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 11:20:52 PST
- From:
- Cc: moo-cows@parc.xerox.com
- Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
- In-Reply-To: <l0302090daf3b85b68b84@[128.243.31.122]>
- References: <l03010d05af3b834f1afa@[129.170.129.14]> <l03020903af3b3186c3a1@[128.243.31.122]> <v01540b0aaf3b57df536e@[208.128.224.116]>

    At 6:44 PM +0000 2/27/97, Jeni Tennison wrote:
    >>At 4:51 AM -0800 2/27/97, Jeni Tennison wrote:
    >>
    >>No.  All uncaught errors and timeouts get shafted to #0, but you can
    >>compensate with a few lines of code:
    >
    >You're completely right: my mistake.  (But they *should* be handled by the
    >object that's handling the connection, IMHO ;)

    Of course . . .

    >And isn't a simpler way to check which object should be handling it through
    >args[4][$][1], which will be the object through which the original command
    >was passed?

    No: there are certain objects that we have that must direct the tracebacks
    to different people, for example, we have a $clock that calls certain verbs
    at certain times, and we change around the value of "player" so that the
    person who put the task on the clock gets the traceback, not the last
    wizard to restart it.

    -manta

References:

- Re: listen()

- From: Jeff Dubrule <igor@linguist.dartmouth.edu>

- Re: listen()

- From: Jeni Tennison <jft@psychology.nottingham.ac.uk>

- listen()

- From: mitch@huh.com (Mitch Haile)

- Re: listen()

- From: Jeni Tennison <jft@psychology.nottingham.ac.uk>

- Prev: Re: listen()
- Next: Mailing list errors
- Index: MOO-cows
- Thread: MOO-cows

Home | Subject Index | Thread Index