[JPR] Hi David,
> "Yes, 4D should trap for bad code coming into a worker and report it in a > way that the developer can manage. 4D should not silently destroy the > worker, lose its context, and restart it without reporting the error." > > If you agree, we have no dispute. So let's have no dispute. I agree with you. At least in a perfect world, with perfect products used by perfect people, I agree this is the way it should be. And be sure that 4D is working on it. Meanwhile I'll try to do defensive programming, then I'll not be trapped by this flaw, and I move forward... > Absolutely! I am also a glass half-full person. But then again, neither of > us has said what we think the glass is half full *of* ;-) For me, it will be half-full (at least) of Puligny-Montrachet 1961 from Maison Faiveley ;-) My very best, JPR > Date: Tue, 9 May 2017 14:53:56 +1000 > From: David Adams <dpad...@gmail.com> > To: 4D iNug Technical <4d_tech@lists.4d.com> > Subject: Re: Preemptive mode flaw ********************************************************************** 4D Internet Users Group (4D iNUG) FAQ: http://lists.4d.com/faqnug.html Archive: http://lists.4d.com/archives.html Options: http://lists.4d.com/mailman/options/4d_tech Unsub: mailto:4d_tech-unsubscr...@lists.4d.com **********************************************************************
