[R6RS] How SRFI 35 enables communication protocols via conditions
Thu Jun 9 12:32:27 EDT 2005
On 9-Jun-05, at 11:52 AM, Michael Sperber wrote:
> For example, in the bug vs. error scenario: it's not that one is the
> *cause* of the other.
Could you elaborate on this example? I'm not sure I follow your
argument. If you have other examples where there is no causal
relationship please give them.
Perhaps you are talking about the "eval" example, where an error in
the expression being evaluated by eval is a bug in the program that
called eval. To me this means that eval will wrap the "error"
condition in a "bug" condition so there is a causal relationship.
> Also, in the "network vs. file-system error"
> scenario, one *is* the cause for the other, but it's not clear why a
> handler with a `network-error?' predicate shouldn't be able to catch
> the condition. What if, when I'm signalling the exception, I want to
> talk to *either* the handler for network errors or file-system errors?
By "either" you mean one or the other, but you don't care which, or
is there some kind of ordering between the handlers from the raiser's
point of view? Doesn't this lead to problems (for example when
changing the implementation of a module). Why is the handler
interested in the details of the implementation?
More information about the R6RS