From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-11389-listarch-gdb-patches=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 1464 invoked by alias); 19 Dec 2001 10:36:54 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 1331 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 10:36:53 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.cygnus.com) (195.224.55.237)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 Dec 2001 10:36:53 -0000
Received: from cygnus.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by localhost.cygnus.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id D738A3E8F; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:36:49 +0000 (GMT)
Message-ID: <3C206DC1.2030009@cygnus.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 02:36:00 -0000
From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:0.9.6) Gecko/20011207
X-Accept-Language: en-us
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Don Howard <dhoward@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFA] error-catching mechanism for scripts
References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0112171700200.18540-100000@theotherone.redhat-remotie.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2001-12/txt/msg00456.txt.bz2

>  try
> 	  some commands that might error
> 	except
> 	  some commands to recover from error 
> 	  (errors in this block will not be caught)
> 	end


Just a question.  Given:

	try
	  try
	    some commands that might error
	  except
	    some commands to recover from error
	    (erros in this block will not be caught)
	  end
	end

I assume the outer try catches errors from the inner except.  Looking at 
the code, I think this is what happens and, I think, is correct.

What about CNTRL-C?  Does that abort the commands or does except catch it?

Hmm (thinking out loud).  What about internal-error, er, that throws an 
``error'' which the user can now catch.  I guess for the moment this is 
a feature :-)

BTW, catch_errors() is discouraged in favour of catch_exceptions().  PTR 
  -> void *.

I see the tests are comming.  Ya!

Can I suggest expanding the doco to include an example. Even if it is 
just the example you posted with ``some commands that might error'' etc. 
  I can't think of something that is guarenteed to cause a error - ah, a 
`maint error'' command :-/

Andrew