Re: Toward an omnibus Perl 6 Exceptions RFC, v0.1.

>>>>> "TO" == Tony Olekshy <[email protected]> writes:

TO> However, many people have broached topics such as conditional catch
TO> blocks (such as those based on the exception's isa relationships),
TO> multiple catch clauses with varying conditions, and post-finally
TO> catch blocks.

TO> I agree that we don't have a great handle on the flow-control semantics
TO> for multiple catch blocks.  We're working on it.  But if we can come
TO> up with some decent simple rules, then I see no reason to prohibit
TO> careful use of more complex constructs.

What in the simple methodology combined with Damian's switch monster,
is missing?

I'll hazard a guess that, if the complex syntax goes in and if there
is no semantic issue, -internals will likely convert the complex
version internally to a switch.

So is it syntactical sugar or something that can't be done otherwise?

<chaim>
-- 
Chaim Frenkel					     Nonlinear Knowledge, Inc.
[email protected]				               +1-718-236-0183