[#4595] New block syntax — Daniel Amelang <daniel.amelang@...>

I'm really sorry if this isn't the place to talk about this. I've

25 messages 2005/03/21
[#4606] Re: New block syntax — "David A. Black" <dblack@...> 2005/03/21

Hi --

[#4629] Re: New block syntax — "Sean E. Russell" <ser@...> 2005/03/30

On Monday 21 March 2005 16:17, David A. Black wrote:

[#4648] about REXML::Encoding — speakillof <speakillof@...>

Hi.

15 messages 2005/03/31
[#4659] Re: about REXML::Encoding — "Sean E. Russell" <ser@...> 2005/04/04

On Thursday 31 March 2005 09:44, speakillof wrote:

Re: Undefined Errno::EPROTO and the like raises NameError

From: Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
Date: 2005-03-08 02:58:50 UTC
List: ruby-core #4529
Hi,

In message "Re: Undefined Errno::EPROTO and the like raises NameError"
    on Tue, 8 Mar 2005 10:41:45 +0900, Daniel Berger <djberg96@yahoo.com> writes:

|>   class Errno::NOERROR
|>   end

|How about Errno::UNKNOWNERROR?  Or Errno::UNDEFERROR?
|Errno::NOERROR seems like a contradiction.

Errno::NOERROR (or whatever) is an system call exception class that
would never be raised from any system call.  An exception class which
is not supposed to be raised is something contradicting by nature.  I
think your feeling reflects this situation.

It's not UNKNOWNERROR since it's known.  UNDEFERROR sounds strange for
me, since it's explicitly defined (in a sense).

I am open to other name proposals.

							matz.

In This Thread

Prev Next