Mathias Bauer wrote:
Frank Schönheit - Sun Microsystems Germany wrote:
Hi Andreas,
Great, this would solve the problem. Maybe we then should
think about a cheap solution, at least for now. E.g. a spe-
cial object named CurrentUnoException or something like
that could be provided by Basic in case an UNO exception
error occurs containing the Exception object.
+1
This would
match with the err variable concept and we wouldn't have
to implement the complete try/catch syntax that isn't
Basic like anyway.
Well ... how is "Basic like" defined? By the Basic originally invented
some decades ago, by one of the zillions of Basic dialects out there, or
by what we me make of it? I certainly vote for the latter ...
We also need, IMO, a "throw". (I think Mathias will agree to me here.
AFAIK, his repeated argueing for exception-less UNO API originates from
his team's experiences with existing API which could not be used in
Basic, since this would have required the script to throw an exception.)
If we would decide to have it, *not* having try/catch would look ...
senseless.
Yes, that's one point. The other point is a missing real "catch"
support. The "On error goto" is not sufficient as it doesn't allow to
specify where the program should continue in case an exception got
caught (except by flooding your code with jump labels and your
"exception handlers" with gazillions of Goto statement).
If we had a usable exception support in OOo Basic we still can have
problems with other languages like e.g. VBA but that might be bearable.
I don't know wether our Scripting Framework and the possible scripting
languages using it support exceptions. Andreas should know better.
at least JAVA macros work as expected with exceptions ;-)
Juergen
Ciao,
Mathias
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
