Re: bug in 8.4.14 return -code error?
- From: Bryan Oakley <oakley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 20:00:40 GMT
Andreas Leitgeb wrote:
Bryan Oakley <oakley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Don Porter wrote:Bryan Oakley wrote:Yes. return -code error doesn't behave according to the documentation IMO.I'm seeing what looks like buggy behavior with "return -code error" in 8.4.14.Is it at odds with any documentation?
I don't think it's a bug.
[return -code error] is designed to make the *current procedure*
behave like the command "error", not to be equivalent to [error]
itself.
catch {return -code error} is 2(return) , not 1(error)
Hmmm. I guess I see the point, though it still seems non-intuitive. If catch catches "return -code error -errorcode foo", I would expect to be able to retrieve the errorcode I specified. Apparently not, though the documentation doesn't seem to give a hint about that.
I guess this means that 8.5 has a regression in this regard, then.
--
Bryan Oakley
www.tclscripting.com
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: bug in 8.4.14 return -code error?
- From: Don Porter
- Re: bug in 8.4.14 return -code error?
- References:
- bug in 8.4.14 return -code error?
- From: Bryan Oakley
- Re: bug in 8.4.14 return -code error?
- From: Don Porter
- Re: bug in 8.4.14 return -code error?
- From: Bryan Oakley
- Re: bug in 8.4.14 return -code error?
- From: Andreas Leitgeb
- bug in 8.4.14 return -code error?
- Prev by Date: Re: Amazon S3 library, new release
- Next by Date: Re: configure tile treeview font
- Previous by thread: Re: bug in 8.4.14 return -code error?
- Next by thread: Re: bug in 8.4.14 return -code error?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|