Hi Marino
Suppose I want to map from OpenDBX errors to SqueakDBX exceptions, I have
to do it with the index of the array then. So, if you then change, reorder
or whatever you do with the array, I will map wrong exceptions :(
That won't happen until 2.0 as I would break binary compatibility
Hi Mariano
Why you think that is a bad idea? Don't you need (sometimes) to distinguish
between one error and others? for example, don't you need to do or not to
do something depending on the error you received ? Ok, you can have the
error number as an instance variable and then use a switch
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 2:31 PM, Norbert Sendetzky
norb...@linuxnetworks.dewrote:
Hi Mariano
Why you think that is a bad idea? Don't you need (sometimes) to
distinguish
between one error and others? for example, don't you need to do or not to
do something depending on the error you
On Tue September 29 2009 23:57:06 Mariano Martinez Peck wrote:
The question is: when I have an error with OpenDBX I can then call
odbx_error() to obtain the description. The thing is, is that error number
unique? I mean, if I have an error number -3 with the description XXX
every time I get a
On Wed September 30 2009 04:23:03 Mariano Martinez Peck wrote:
Sorry, but I think the best thing is that I tell you my current problem:
I don't remember C++ (I just programmed only once a couple of years ago)
but in several object oriented languages, there is the concept of error
handling
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 4:13 AM, Norbert Sendetzky norb...@linuxnetworks.de
wrote:
On Tue September 29 2009 23:57:06 Mariano Martinez Peck wrote:
The question is: when I have an error with OpenDBX I can then call
odbx_error() to obtain the description. The thing is, is that error
number
Sorry, but I think the best thing is that I tell you my current problem: I
don't remember C++ (I just programmed only once a couple of years ago) but
in several object oriented languages, there is the concept of error handling
using exceptions. And of course, this is the case of Smalltalk. I
