Re: source on p:error

ht@inf.ed.ac.uk (Henry S. Thompson) writes:
> Hmm.  What benefit follows?  If it has an inline, or an explicit
> connection, doesn't matter if it's primary or not.  In the (admittedly
> unlikely) case where you do in fact want to compute the error output,
> having it be non-primary is a pain.  I can't think of any situation
> where having it be primary will cause a problem. . .

It leads naturally to the confusing and very rarely useful situation
where the primary output of the preceding step becomes the error
message.

If you're using p:error, you almost always want to provide a message.
Making the port non-primary will catch the error where you forget to
define it.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | To enjoy yourself and make others enjoy
http://nwalsh.com/            | themselves, without harming yourself or
                              | any other; that, to my mind, is the
                              | whole of ethics.-- Chamfort