That's correct, the point of the reply is now the base of the call stack
and has no higher levels. It's been that way for 30 years now. The only
real way to trap that would be to have base method of the new thread issue
it's own signal on syntax.
Rick
On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 11:30 AM Erich Steinböck <erich.steinbo...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> When I tried to enhance our test framework to support assert failures from
> concurrent threads that were started from test methods, I noticed that a
> syntax error in the replied thread of a method cannot be trapped. Try
> running below code with either .c~before or .c~after.
>
> That would mean the concurrent thread has no caller. Is that how it
> should be?
> Any ideas how to still trap a syntax in the concurrent thread?
>
> ~~~
> signal on syntax
> .c~before -- or .c~after
> return
> syntax:
> say "captured" condition("object")~code
>
> ::class c
> ::method before class
> say 1/0
> reply
>
> ::method after class
> reply
> say 1/0
> ~~~
> _______________________________________________
> Oorexx-devel mailing list
> Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
>
_______________________________________________
Oorexx-devel mailing list
Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
