Re: [lmi] Stylistic question about constructing error messages

[Greg Chicares]

On 2016-02-13 17:32, Vadim Zeitlin wrote:
[...]
>  The last two are fine, but lmi_error() is now _insufficiently_ frightening
> because it's not clear that this function is going to throw an exception
> and not return. I'd prefer lmi_throw_error() or even just lmi_throw().
> Perhaps something like lmi_error_no_return() could do as well, but I think
> it's very valuable to have a reminder that this function doesn't return.
> 
>  Could you find some name which would have "throw", "exception" or
> "no_return" in its name and yet be acceptable to you? This is not urgent at
> all, of course, especially because I found a bug in handling of select
> tables (not all ages are consecutive, after all...), so I'm busy with
> fixing it right now anyhow. But if you can think of something more explicit
> than lmi_error() but less fearsome than lmi_fatal(), it would be great.

select tables...not consecutive: Do you simply mean that they're select
and ultimate, e.g.

  ---select-- ult.
  a0 a1 a2 a3  x4
  b1 b2 b3 b4  x5
  c2 c3 c4 c5  x6
               x7

means these row vectors (indented only in the hope of clarity)?

  a0 a1 a2 a3 x4 x5 x6 x7
     b1 b2 b3 b4 x5 x6 x7
        c2 c3 c4 c5 x6 x7

Or are there other areas of nonconsecutiveness?

insufficiently frightening: I'd rather prepend "lmi_" to an evocative
word than to a phrase. Do you like any of these verbs?
  balk
  revert
  recoil
  ricochet
  boomerang
  teleport
I don't much like 'revert' because it sounds like a VCS action; or
'teleport', which attempts to capture the meaning of longjmp but
sounds too much like a science-fiction cliché. Wait...nethack...

  lmi_branchport

What do you say to that?