That is indeed an option, but I'm of the school of thought that it's better for a program or operation in a program to silently catch an error and correct it for the user than to just fail outright.

...and I'm of the school of thought that a program should silently toil away doing it's appointed task until it encounters something it's not expecting, at which point, it should be noisy as hell. Fixing something for the end user is not always the best solution, because what if your notion of "fixed" is different than what the user had in mind? The road to crufty code becomes short indeed.

On the other hand, if you want to subsribe to the "be liberal in what you accept and strict in what you output" philosophy (which is what I think you were getting at), that's fine, just don't do it silently. Document every feature that you have coded (as well as known limitations, bugs, etc...)

thor