- From: Florent Georges <fgeorges@fgeorges.org>
- Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 00:52:23 +0100
- To: QuiXProc XProc <quixproc@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Imsieke, Gerrit, le-tex" <gerrit.imsieke@le-tex.de>, XProc Dev <xproc-dev@w3.org>
Which is syntactic sugar for try/catch. I'm not saying syntactic sugar is not something XProc needs, but then it would probably bets addressed at the level of XProc itself (could be a standard attribute) rather than each step inventing its own vocabulary for that. Just my 2 cents... Regards, -- Florent Georges http://fgeorges.org/ http://h2oconsulting.be/ On 24 March 2013 23:30, QuiXProc XProc wrote: > Probably then the attribut should be "ignore-on-error" and the value being > the QName of the error (or a list of QNames ?), instead of "error-if-fail" > > Mohamed > > > On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 7:57 PM, Florent Georges wrote: >> >> On 24 March 2013 19:37, Imsieke, Gerrit, le-tex wrote: >> >> > A use case: I want to make sure that a directory is empty >> > before I extract a zip to it (creating the directory if >> > necessary). So I’m deleting the directory before extraction, >> > and I don’t want to be bothered by an error if the directory >> > doesn’t exist. Try/catching this would feel too verbose, >> > although I admit that other errors, such as insufficient >> > privilieges, could be cought. >> >> I think that's precisely my point. If you want to ignore a >> precise error, because you know that it makes sense in your case >> to ignore THAT error, then catch that error. If something else >> happens, it will resolve to a proper error as it should do. >> >> If you ask to ignore the error and get a c:error instead then >> you have to use conditional structures, which are even more >> verbose... (is it a c:error document?, is it an error document >> for an expected error?, etc.) >> >> But it is true that I usually pay more attention than others to >> having proper error detection and handling. So it might just be >> me. >> >> Regards, >> >> -- >> Florent Georges >> http://fgeorges.org/ >> http://h2oconsulting.be/ >> >
Received on Sunday, 24 March 2013 23:53:13 UTC