[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Terminology of error-ology
- To: Mary <Fontana.Ti-Csl@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
- Subject: Terminology of error-ology
- From: Steven <Handerson@CMU-CS-C.ARPA>
- Date: Wed, 17 Oct 1984 18:25 EDT
- Cc: cl-error-handling@SU-AI.ARPA
- In-reply-to: Msg of 17 Oct 1984 12:44-EDT from Mary <Fontana at TI-CSL>
Yeah, that's what I was thinking, but I don't think it's particularly valuable
to define an error that way. Error can and should be thought of in many
contexts, and I don't think "condition with a debugger handler" needs a new
name - I think "errorful condition" is enough. Condition can too, but I think
it's only other major meaning is Event.
Just to be argumentative, I don't think you need every condition to have a
handler - for some applications, the debugger may be inappropriate. Perhaps as
a matter of style you do, and obviously you don't want the "no handler"
condition to have no handler.