[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: non-local exits with signal and condition-case
From: |
Nic Ferrier |
Subject: |
Re: non-local exits with signal and condition-case |
Date: |
Sun, 02 Jun 2013 22:33:48 +0100 |
Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> writes:
> Could you explain in more detail what you do that doesn't work well
> with catch?
I'll use a specific example (but it really is indicative, I find this
happens to me more often that not doing non-local exits).
This is a heavily simplified version of something I just wrote for the
new elnode based emacswiki:
(defun make-page (page-name)
(let ((buf (find-file-noselect page-name)))
(with-current-buffer buf
(when (re-search-forward "^REDIRECT \\(.*\\)" nil t)
(throw :redirect (match-string 1))))
;; Otherwise we need to send the page
(start-page buf)
(send-page (buf->html buf))))
(defun serve-page (http)
(let ((page-name (get-page http)))
(let ((value
(catch :redirect
(make-page page-name))))
(when value
(send-redirect http value)))))
Note how the throw is being used to communicate place and value but in
the catch I only need to know that there was an exceptional condition.
This is the essence of the problem I think. catch does not support, of
itself, exceptional conditions. You have to overlay support for them
with extra typing.
In this example, I could be in trouble is make-page ever returns
anything. So I could throw a cons with a type indicator (say, :redirect)
and check for the type in the when. But that is a lot more work.
I've played with making macros around catch but in the end they seem
little better than having a signal. Is there a technical reason why a
signal is bad compared to catch/throw?
> BTW, you might like the `cl-return' macro as well
> (to use within `cl-block's).
I strongly dislike sprinkling cl- namespace through my code. It makes it
much less readable to me.
>> (defmacro defsignal (err-symbol inherits-list message)
>> (let ((errv (make-symbol "err-v")))
>> `(let ((,errv ,err-symbol))
>> (put ,errv
>> 'error-conditions
>> (quote ,inherits-list))
>
> You probably want to cons `errv' in front of inherits-list.
I thought about that before I sent it - I think you are probably
right. But my understanding is that you don't need the symbol to be
present; you can disassociate the symbol used to send the signal from
the symbol(s) used to capture it.
I think (as you suggest) a define-signal form should probably not support that
directly because it seems quite counter intuitive.
> FWIW, I wouldn't mind introducing such a macro. Not for the use of
> non-local exits, but to make it easier to define new error conditions.
>
> I would also welcome changes to make the "error-message" part more
> flexible (e.g. be able to use a function, maybe).
>
>> I'm not sure where to put this.
>
> We could add it to subr.el (tho I'd call it define-signal).
Shall I send patches then?
Nic