From: Luigi Ballabio <luigi.ballabio@...>
Date: 2001-03-24T03:08:06+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:13148] Re: How would Ruby say this?

At 01:50 AM 3/24/01 +0900, you wrote:

>Lyle Johnson:
> >
> >...
> >     initial = 42.0
> >     status, result = getValue(initial, "What it is?")
> >     if status
> >         puts "The user responds: #{result}"
> >     else
> >         puts "The user cancelled without responding"
> >     end
> >
> >     begin
> >         initial = 42.0
> >         result = getValue(initial, "What it is?")
> >         puts "The user responds: #{result}"
> >     rescue CancelError
> >         puts "The user cancelled without responding"
> >     end
> > ...
>
>Dave Thomas:
> > ...
> > A third option would be to return 'nil' on no input (as presumably nil
> > can never be returned). Then you can write
> >
> >   if res = getValue("What's the frequency..")
> >      process ...
> >   else
> >      no input
> >   end
>
>There are times when returning multiple values in an array makes sense,
>but in this case the values are both really concerned with the same
>input, so yes it seems awkward. Either of the other approaches would
>seem pretty reasonable.

I suppose cancelling is a perfectly legal choice for an user. If this is 
the case, returning nil sounds better to me than throwing an exception.

Just my .02$,
                 Luigi