Re: Common exception handling
- From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 21:14:10 +0200
On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 09:49:59 -0700 (PDT), Adam Beneschan wrote:
Maybe this use of CASE should be allowed, even if we don't go all the
way and make exceptions first-class entities in other ways. What does
anyone else think... would it be a worthwhile feature to propose
adding? Or is it just too "special" (if we added this, others would
ask, well why shouldn't we allow CASE on a string, or a record, or a
container, or just expand it using some user-specified relational
operator so that we can use it for everything...)?
Right, I fully agree. Ada is overloaded with "special" features.
I prefer exceptions become a "normal" discrete type (only in the interface
of). I wished to have ranges of exceptions so that one could define a group
of related exceptions, and be able to extend such groups. This could the
first step in order to make exceptions contracted.
There is a similar important case, the type tags. Tags and exceptions have
much in common. It would be very nice to find a generic mechanism for
handling such things. That would remove a lot of "magic" from the language,
IMO.
--
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Common exception handling
- From: Maciej Sobczak
- Re: Common exception handling
- References:
- Common exception handling
- From: shaunpatterson
- Re: Common exception handling
- From: shaunpatterson
- Re: Common exception handling
- From: Adam Beneschan
- Common exception handling
- Prev by Date: Re: Common exception handling
- Next by Date: Re: www.ada-auth.org is down
- Previous by thread: Re: Common exception handling
- Next by thread: Re: Common exception handling
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|