I think if there was the ability of bubble up error handling (that will be a big topic for the newly elected steering committee), it would make good sense to match up throws with catches.
Each circuit could catch specific throws or catch type="all" throws. If no circuit caught an error, a debugging message would be displayed to the user. Ultimately we don't want to do that, it's unprofessional in a live environment. By matching up throws with catches, we can ensure that when errors are thrown they are caught too. Steve Patrick McElhaney wrote: > > Steve wrote: > > > > I like the idea of matching the throws up with > > the catches. I currently test my fusedocs before > > i start coding by doing simple matches between in > > and out variables. We could and probably should do > > the same thing with exceptions. > > I don't think that's a good idea. I tend to think of > exceptions as an alternative to <cfabort>. Something > really unexpected happens and the only thing you can > do at this point is give up. But you don't want to > <cfabort> because that would stop the whole > application. What you really want to do is stop this > module and let the code that called it decide what > to how to proceed. > > Therefore you should only really be concerned with > the throws. The catches (if there are any) are outside > the code you have control over. You can't and > shouldn't match up catches with throws. > > Patrick > ==^================================================================ This email was sent to: [email protected] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bUrFMa.bV0Kx9 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^================================================================
