[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: The straight story on ERRSET and related topics
- To: Kent M Pitman <KMP@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA>
- Subject: Re: The straight story on ERRSET and related topics
- From: email@example.com (Richard Berman)
- Date: 26 Sep 1986 1200-PDT (Friday)
- Cc: CL-ERROR-HANDLING@SU-AI.ARPA, CL-VALIDATION@SU-AI.ARPA, dfm@JASPER.PALLADIAN.COM
- In-reply-to: Your message of Thu, 25 Sep 86 17:50 EDT. <860925175039.3.KMP@RIO-DE-JANEIRO.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
This whole discussion of ERRSET has gotten way out of line. I am not
proposing ANYTHING having to do with error control. PERIOD. I was simply
trying to find out if current implementations have enough error control
already, regardless of the form, for me to assume I could implement an
ERRSET-like function in them. The conclusion was yes. I needed just that
level of control for the test controller.
As a matter of fact, I would rather neither wait until the error stuff was
official, nor use it fully when it is in place because that is one area that
will be tested, and to rely heavily upon it in the test controller would be a
mistake. The simpler the mechanism the better so far as my task is concerned.
This was not ever, nor is it now, really an issue for the error handling
people, or any of the technical discussion groups. I am raising no questions
about the correctness or ERRSET or any particular method of handling errors.
As a matter of fact, it isn't a discussion issue. It was just a survey of the
existing error control mechanisms amongst vendors.