Dominique Pfister wrote:
I wouldn't call it error code, then: every time something changes
either in the calling code or in the code throwing the exception,
you'll get a different hash code.
Agreed, the stack trace might be too unstable. But I still like the idea
of using something cryptic for error codes. To see what I mean try
Googling for "error 1" and "error 0x800cccff". The second query gives
much more precise results.
OTOH it needn't be the error code. We could also include it just at what
it is, a hash tag.
Michael
Dominique
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 10:32 AM, Michael Dürig <michael.due...@day.com> wrote:
== Use Error Codes ==
What about using something like a hash code (for example of the current
stack trace) as error code? These would then automatically serve as hash
tags for Google searches. That is, errors pasted into a discussion forum
would be indexed by Google. Searching for 'Error
6df8c9ef2aa1cf7b04b52939b7c1cd7e' would then practically unambiguously lead
to that post.
Michael
