At 5/30/2007 10:51 AM, Richard Lynch wrote:
>On Wed, May 30, 2007 12:00 pm, Paul Novitski wrote:
>[snip] use the archives

Good suggestion!


>HOWEVER: it is not a good idea, imho, to "always" let the errors
>bubble up to the outer layer, which is what Paul seemed to have
>typed...

But didn't.


>The problem with that approach is that you end up being painted into a
>corner where your application can do little more than print "It
>broke." because the low-level context is not available to the caller
>of the function.

If you'll refer back to my posting to which you're replying without
quoting, you'll read:

At 5/30/2007 10:00 AM, Paul Novitski wrote:
>Because a low-level error may in turn trigger higher-level errors as
>it bubbles back up, it may make sense to turn this into an error
>stack to which each calling function adds its understanding of the
>problem as the error bubbles back up:
....
>When a high-level function receives an error state from a called
>function, it can (if desired) walk down the stack to learn the
>technical origin of the error as well as its implications during the bubble-up.

It sounds like we're on the same page, Richard!

Regards,

Paul
__________________________

Paul Novitski
Juniper Webcraft Ltd.
http://juniperwebcraft.com