AS/400 How does it look?

[Terrence Enger]

On Thu, 2008-08-28 at 13:06 -0400, CLIFFORD ILKAY wrote:
> Terrence Enger wrote:
> [snip]
> > It is somewhat common for a program to catch run-time errors and eat or
> > mangle the diagnostic information.  I suppose the programmers do this in
> > aid of user-friendliness or something.
> > 
> > My own preference goes to the opposite extreme:  upon occurrence of a
> > run-time error, halt.  Halt hard.  Right now!  And be in the user's face
> > about it, too.
> [snip]
> 
> Or, you could just slap a permanent "Beta" label on your application and 
> not worry about all that fancy exception handling. You'd be Web 2.0 
> compliant! :)

And I would probably be able to find work.  If only I could bring myself
to do things like that <sigh />.

Actually, I program *much less* exception handling than is common.
Better, I think, to put the effort on not provoking exceptions in the
first place.  Of course, I work in an environment where the default
exception handling is pretty good.

( Well, obviously, there are--pardon the puns--exceptions.  Sometimes a
program needs to verify the absence of an object using a command which
verifies the *presence* of the object.  It is entirely too bad that the
mechanism is the same and it is still called *exception handling". )

Thank you for your comment.
Terry.


--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists