On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 10:50 PM, David Nolen wrote:
> Would it be possible to make the arguments to handle be optional? Is this a
> good or bad idea?
(kit/with-handler
(vec (map int-half [2 4 5 8]))
(kit/handle *odd-number-error* [n]
(throw (Exception. (format "Odd number %d in vector."
Would it be possible to make the arguments to handle be optional? Is this a
good or bad idea?
It seems to me, in the case of setting up test fixtures that check for
raised errors, often you don't care what arguments the error takes.
David
On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 9:10 PM, Chouser wrote:
> (kit/
On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Meikel Brandmeyer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am 08.02.2009 um 14:31 schrieb Chouser:
>
>> (deferror *foo* [*bar*] "Foo Error" [arg1])
>> (deferror *foo* "Foo Error" [*bar*] [arg1]) ; oops
>
> A question w/o looking at the actual implementation
> code or further thinking abou
Hi,
Am 08.02.2009 um 14:31 schrieb Chouser:
(deferror *foo* [*bar*] "Foo Error" [arg1])
(deferror *foo* "Foo Error" [*bar*] [arg1]) ; oops
A question w/o looking at the actual implementation
code or further thinking about possible issues:
Is there a reason why not to place the docstring
as i
On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 5:18 AM, David Nolen wrote:
>
> Sweet!
I'm glad it's working for you, and that you have figured out how to
use it despite the almost complete lack of docs. :-P
> That said I do have one minor annoyance and that is the need to leave an
> empty bracket if you want to creat
So far this is fantastic! And I haven't even got around to playing with the
restart mechanism :) I'm using it in Spinoza to provide contextual errors
(malformed slot list, missing base class etc.). I notice the contrib
libraries in general are very good at throwing exceptions so that consumers
hav
Nice I will most definitely be checking this out and get back with thoughts.
I've been fearing the need to define custom Java Exception for my code and
this looks most useful for people who wish to code as much as possible in
pure Clojure.
On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 9:10 PM, Chouser wrote:
>
> It's
It's not currently possible to define new Java Exceptions without
ahead-of-time compilation, which is sometimes inconvenient. Besides
this, Java's try/catch exception system isn't as flexible as, for
example, Common Lisp's condition/restart system.
To address both these concerns, I've added a li
