Paul, Haven't got time to elucidate but I was in the same position as you about 12 months ago and since using the TCTF construct I now find I use it everywhere.
The great thing is that you can throw an error from lower down the program stack and get the system to simply bubble back to the TCTF structure which can save lots of code if you design your code accordingly. Also, I use it now as a condition/status test as much as a true error handler. As Ed's has done in Dabo, sometimes it is simply better to catch an error than to test for certain conditions/type conditions (eg variable exists). The speed of operation catching the error is almost invariably faster than doing a variable check. Dave Crozier -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Newton Sent: 27 September 2007 01:03 To: [email protected] Subject: Structured error handling Hi I wrote a routine a long time ago to check for corrupt data - the basic contruct was a custom ON ERROR which gets called as a result of a failed USE <table> statement. It worked very well but I was just wondering whether this would be a good excuse for me (at last) to take a look at the TRY...CATCH..THROW...FINALLY construct. To be honest I've often thought that TCTF is something I can live without - would somebody like to convince me otherwise <g> ? Paul Newton [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
