On 04/14/2011 11:38 AM, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote:
Dale,
I think I understand some of your points, there based on valid concerns. We
should end up with a minimal set of exceptions. The current set was not that
large IMHO. But here and there some simplifications are possible.
Thanks for submitting a concrete alternative hierarchy.
However, it feels as if the reasons between using a class and a selector are a
bit arbitrary. I can't make sense out of it.
Another thing that hasn't been discussed so far is what data should go in each
exception.
This has to be done on a blackboard with a couple of people. And it won't be
finished in one go either, far from it.
I'll print out your hierarchy as well !
Sven
Sven,
The names with leading $# were intended to be reasonCodes and with no
leading $# a class name ...
When I editted the list I wasn't thinking very hard:), but I made a best
guess based on what I thought the name entailed (and we had touched on
some of the same things in our GemStone discussions)...So I wouldn't put
much weight on the specifics in my suggestions, I think you get the
general idea ...
the more important information was in my suggested guidelines ... the
decisions should be driven by the needs of the existing Pharo code base
both the core and the applications written against the core ...
BTW, I fully support what you are trying to do and building a good
usable Exception hierarchy is important ... I just wanted to inject a
suggestion or two for consideration...
Dale
