[Web-SIG] New spec: throw_errors

[Ian Bicking]

Luke Arno wrote:
> -1 to the proposed spec
> 
> On 11/13/06, Ian Bicking <ianb at colorstudy.com> wrote:
> ...
>> Other Possibilities
>> -------------------
>>
>> * You can just get the unwrapped application object and test it.
> 
> +1, emphatically
> 
> Let's encourage best practices, before we
> standardize specific workarounds.
> 
> The unwrapped version of the object should also be
> made available for composition purposes, if it is
> intended for such.

OK, then, you're going to have to justify that, because I don't think 
it's best practice ;)

In particular, in many frameworks the presence of an exception catcher 
is automatic and largely opaque to the user.  Of course it doesn't 
*have* to be opaque, but because this is the only case where it really 
matters I don't see why it shouldn't be opaque -- it's not worth explaining.

It's not opaque to me, of course, and yet I never feel a need to unpack 
the object this way, because the one reason I might have is satisfied 
transparently, automatically, and reliably by this environment convention.

Exception handling is something that is generally handled by some 
particular pieces of software -- the exception catcher and test 
frameworks.  If they can agree on this, I don't see a reason anyone else 
needs to think about it.

-- 
Ian Bicking | ianb at colorstudy.com | http://blog.ianbicking.org