Re: Exceptions and Objects

At 12:22 PM 8/12/00 -0500, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
>On Sat, Aug 12, 2000 at 07:07:18AM -0600, Tony Olekshy wrote:
> > I also submitted RFC 96, which tries to address the stuff that
> > is needed for extending beyond builtins while maintaining a
> > standard Perl OO implementation and seperating the exception
> > handling stuff from the exception class.  Rereading RFC 80, I
> > realize that they are closer than I thought, each emphasising
> > different aspects of the problem.
>
>I've read this thread with some interest and I'm puzzled by something.
>Why are "objects" and "exceptions" always mentioned in the same
>breath?  Does one need objects to have exceptions?

Pretty much.  It screams O-O for these reasons:

An exception is an 'error'.  That's already a vague concept.

An error has text associated with it, but also a bunch of other attributes.

They fall naturally into different classes, some of which have subclasses 
(a File error is-a IO error).

Users want to define their own kinds while reusing the semantics of the 
base class.

Bingo.

--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies