Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from July 2013
>--f46d043bdf6a18fbcb04e220e781 >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 >On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 4:44 PM, David E. Wheeler <david@justatheory.com<SNIP> >> >> Crazy? Impossible? Terrifying? >> > Have you looked at the way Golang does exceptions? Their documentation > discourages > exception-driven control flow -- everything returns lists, and the > convention is to make the second element the completion status, to avoid > the out-of-band problem of returning special failure values -- but one > could do it with their available tools. > The most important of these tools is a deferred block, which executes at > scope-tear-down time, like CPAN's OnScopeExit or LocalOnExit. They also > have a global exception objectl like Perl's $@, which is loaded with > "panic" and can be consumed with "recover." If Perl were to (1) support a > DEFER block that worked that way and (2) stop clobbering defined $@ (has > that been fixed? I remember discussion about automatically localizing $@ in > DESTROY) until it is consumed by an equivalent to golang's "recover" that > would be, in my opinion, more powerful than adopting the try/catch idiom > into the core language. > Maybe golang-style panics would be best given their own parallel system, > rather than touching the semantics of $@, no matter how slightly. > In short, I'm opposed to try/catch, as I think it's a tired idiom with > superior alternatives, including what Perl's already got. I would like to see this angle investigated more before we all go tripping merrily down the dodgily paved road that Java and C++ took. --tomThread Previous