Re: No exceptions?

From: paul c <>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 20:01:55 GMT
Message-ID: <TkWog.108089$Mn5.98915_at_pd7tw3no>

Bob Badour wrote:
> paul c wrote:

>> Bob Badour wrote:
>> ...
>>> The way to avoid exceptions is to treat them as compile-time errors.
>> I take it you really mean "ONE way to avoid exceptions ...".  For one 
>> thing, I am interested in being able to express "x join y" in advance 
>> of defining a header for "x" (and I would like to evaluate it as well 
>> if that is logically possible!).

> In what context? I am sure once you specify that, you will find the
> appropriate context for the compile-time error too.

It may sound silly, but the context I have in mind is the most minimal of languages possible, one that strips away as much context as possible.

    One reason it may sound silly is that I don't want to insist that even something as "obvious" as a spelling error should necessarily abort evaluation.

(While I am looking for a logical argument for or against my application of the CWA, my motivation, if that's what you mean by context, is, I think, outside the logical realm so it isn't silly AFAIAC.)

Even if somebody can offer support for handling the syntax and semantic exceptions in the way I suggested, I can see that avoiding what I think of as operational exceptions, like the old fortran compiler behaviour of issuing different diagnostics depending on how much memory it was allocated (or sometimes, no diagnostics if it was given enough memory) can probably not be handled in the same way.

p Received on Thu Jun 29 2006 - 22:01:55 CEST

Original text of this message