At 2:07 PM -0800 2/17/06, CV wrote:
The debugger is aware of the nil return, so shouldn't this be caught therein?
"Should" is a matter of opinion -- I'd be inclined to say yes, but others might disagree. The matter of fact is, the compiler was built with the assumption that arrays would never be nil. The fact that you can now get a nil array reference is a side-effect of the relatively new feature allowing arrays to be return values. Yes, probably the compiler "should" have been fixed in every place that touches an array to check whether it's nil and raise an exception, but it was not. Since you say there are already feedback reports about it, I don't see that anything more needs to be done by us. I'm sure they'll get to this issue (or set of issues) when they can.
Best, - Joe -- Joseph J. Strout [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode: <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/> Search the archives of this list here: <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
