L
Logan Capaldo
Allright here was my idea which seems to have been shattered by the
realities of Ruby.
I was thinking of a class called Try. You would do something like
class Try
...
end
tryblock = Try.new { #This block would normally be wrapped in a begin...rescue
}
tryblock.add_exhandlerSomeException) { |ex| some_code }
tryblock.execute #or possibly tryblock.call ?
Basically the idea was going to be you could subclass Try and provide
default sensible handling of your Exceptions (if you were writing a
library for instance) . Users could then then wrap it in a
begin...rescue block to catch other exceptions or use add_exhandler to
overide the default handler. (Possibly provide a way to get the old
handler and and use it in the new).
my idea was going to be that I could do something like
begin
user_proc.call
[SomeEx1, SomeEx2, etc..].each do |ex|
rescue ex => e
handler_hash[ex].call(e)
end
Unfortunately the syntax doesn;t seem to allow for this. Am I missing
something? is this just a really bad idea?
realities of Ruby.
I was thinking of a class called Try. You would do something like
class Try
...
end
tryblock = Try.new { #This block would normally be wrapped in a begin...rescue
}
tryblock.add_exhandlerSomeException) { |ex| some_code }
tryblock.execute #or possibly tryblock.call ?
Basically the idea was going to be you could subclass Try and provide
default sensible handling of your Exceptions (if you were writing a
library for instance) . Users could then then wrap it in a
begin...rescue block to catch other exceptions or use add_exhandler to
overide the default handler. (Possibly provide a way to get the old
handler and and use it in the new).
my idea was going to be that I could do something like
begin
user_proc.call
[SomeEx1, SomeEx2, etc..].each do |ex|
rescue ex => e
handler_hash[ex].call(e)
end
Unfortunately the syntax doesn;t seem to allow for this. Am I missing
something? is this just a really bad idea?