W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > June 2008

[Bug 5795] Static Typing: CVS: K2-Steps-2, K2-FunctionProlog-14

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 12:04:05 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1KBqCr-0006uR-KP@wiggum.w3.org>


--- Comment #6 from Tim Mills <tim@cbcl.co.uk>  2008-06-26 12:04:05 ---
> I don't see how that holds. I'd say that just because an expression raise an
> error, doesn't make it ok to rewrite to function fn:error.

We only do this wtih dynamic errors.

Why wouldn't this rewrite be valid?  Could a user see a difference between an
expression raising an error and a call to fn:error?

Does anyone else have an opinion on this?

Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 26 June 2008 12:04:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:45:37 UTC