Tony,
Having done the exercise of redoing all your RFC 88 examples into RFC 119
syntax, I conclude that the two biggest differences between the syntaxes is
the explicit or implicit try, which is mostly an irrelevant placeholder;
some like it, some don't.
The biggest syntax simplifications came i
On Thu, Aug 24, 2000 at 10:47:45AM -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
> > > But I initially wanted to do without the => ... unfortunately that would
> > > require another keyword to handle the EXPR case and it didn't seem
> > worth it.
> >
> >Not necessarily.
> >
> > catch { EXPR } { ... }
At 12:50 PM 8/24/00 -0500, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> > How should the parser disambiguate
> >
> > my ($hash,%hash);
> > try { ... } catch $hash { ... }
> >
> > ? But if we require the comma, we know it's parseable, because map can
> do it.
>
>map is a slightly different animal because
On Thu, Aug 24, 2000 at 10:10:49AM -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
> At 12:07 PM 8/24/00 -0500, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> > > catch Alarm => { ... }
> > > catch Alarm, Error => { ... }
> > > catch $@ =~ /divide by 0/ => { ... }
> >
> >The => here seems like useless syntax to me.
>
> Au c
At 12:07 PM 8/24/00 -0500, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> > catch Alarm => { ... }
> > catch Alarm, Error => { ... }
> > catch $@ =~ /divide by 0/ => { ... }
>
>The => here seems like useless syntax to me.
Au contraire... it emerged from our discussion of this case:
> catch EXP
On Thu, Aug 24, 2000 at 03:37:59PM -, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
> =head1 TITLE
>
> Omnibus Structured Exception/Error Handling Mechanism
Woohoo!
> catch Alarm => { ... }
> catch Alarm, Error => { ... }
> catch $@ =~ /divide by 0/ => { ... }
The => here seems like useless synta
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Omnibus Structured Exception/Error Handling Mechanism
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Tony Olekshy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 08 Aug 2000
Last Modified: 23 Aug 2000
Version: 2
Mailing List: [E
