On 22 Aug 2000, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
> Could you tell me why you would want two finallys?
>
> Why not put them into one?
> TO> my ($p, $q);
> TO> try { $p = P->new; $q = Q->new; ... }
> TO> finally { $p and $p->Done; }
> TO> finally { $q and $q->Done; }
Presumably because all finally blocks are executed before exceptions
thrown in finally blocks are propagated upwards. That's my guess at
least.
-dave
/*==================
www.urth.org
We await the New Sun
==================*/
- Re: RFC 88: Possible problem with shared lexical scope. Tony Olekshy
- Re: RFC 88: Possible problem with shared lexical sc... Dave Rolsky
- Re: RFC 88: Possible problem with shared lexica... Tony Olekshy
- Re: RFC 88: Possible problem with shared le... Peter Scott
- Re: RFC 88: Possible problem with shar... Tony Olekshy
- Re: RFC 88: Possible problem with ... Peter Scott
- Re: RFC 88: Possible problem with ... Tony Olekshy
- Re: RFC 88: Possible problem with ... Peter Scott
- Re: RFC 88: Possible problem with shar... Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 88: Possible problem with shared lexical scope. Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 88: Possible problem with shared lexical scope. Dave Rolsky
- Re: RFC 88: Possible problem with shared lexical sc... Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 88: Possible problem with shared lexica... Tony Olekshy
- Re: RFC 88: Possible problem with shared le... Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 88: Possible problem with shar... Tony Olekshy
- RE: RFC 88: Possible problem with shared lexical scope. Brust, Corwin
