I rather see people writing decent code that tries to recover and do the right thing.True - but when you don't know who's going to use your module, and in what ways, it may be difficult to know what the right thing is, but that's a fair point.
Personally I do mix exceptions and return values depending on the module and script (not quite as chaotic as it sounds :) - I've certainly found that a fairly judicial use of exceptions can clean code up no end, and the less code I write, the less chance for error.
I've built a few larger applications/modules around Exception::Class, and I'd hate to try to re-implement them checking every return value, but as I said in an earlier post, I always found exceptions in Java a pain in the **** for the reasons you've stated.
As for P6 - who knows? Every time I read (or try to read) an appocalypse I feel worried, but then Damian usually manages to make it all sound ok. The only thing I've seen so far that sounds terrible is whitespace determining how a method is called - P6 should definitely absorb some of Pythons better features, but I'd prefer it if they left whitespace the hell alone :)
In reply to Re: Re: Re: Re: <rant>CPAN modules failing to check for write errors</rant>
by Anonymous Monk
in thread <rant>CPAN modules failing to check for write errors</rant>
by Anonymous Monk
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |