Peter Scott wrote:
>
> If that were so, even without the ignore() function, I could just say
>
> sub Exception::IO::throw { 'do nothing' }
>
> and kill it that way.
Right. Just like overriding core die. At that point you can
change the semantics in such a way as to turn your code in
[Redirected to -errors]
At 11:23 AM 8/16/00 -0500, you wrote:
>On 15 Aug 2000, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
>
> > =head2 Exceptions
> >
> > Exceptions are objects belonging to some C class. Cing
> > an exception creates the object; therefore, C above is just a
> > class name. C lets you subclass
At 11:52 PM 8/15/00 -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
> > "PS" == Peter Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> Please include the comments about global variables and action at a
> distance.
>
>PS> I'm sorry, my brain is fried. Can you spell out for me what you mean in
>PS> this context and I'll
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 04:39:24PM -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
> >PRL> =head2 Exception classes - ignoring
> >
> >PRL> Note that we could also make it possible to selectively or globally
> >ignore
> >PRL> exceptions, so that perl continues executing the line after the C
> >PRL> statement. Just imp
Chaim Frenkel wrote:
>
> > [stuff about exceptions being self-ignorable]
>
> I am adamant against increasing the number of methods of creating
> action at a distance. (Look at the planed removal of all the $/, etc
> variables. Don't keep adding this type of problem.
I agree completely. Not to p
