Re^19: eval to replace die?

[BrowserUk]

You see what happens, right?

Yes. You've made a change to the program, so you run it through your test suite. ( You do have one don't you?)

You discover the problem and you correct it. End of.

But let me assure you it's tame against the shit I've seen in production over the years.

Then fix your process.

[mithaldu]

With an exception that is a structure there is no need to correct any problem. The test suite still passes because there is no problem.

Which was the whole point of this entire debate: It is much easier to run into trouble by using string-only errors.

[BrowserUk]

It is much easier to run into trouble

Coding a feature change is not "running into trouble". Doing a half-assed job of it is just sloppy. Allowing that sloppiness to get into production is bad process. You cannot correct bad process by over-engineering.

Your derived contrived example code made no sense.

There was no reason to parse the error message. You never did anything with the results of the parsing.

Which was the whole point of this entire debate:

You think? Read again.

[mithaldu]

You cannot correct bad process by over-engineering.

You are right, i cannot. I can merely lessen the chance of others actions based on bad process being a danger and i will gladly do so.

There was no reason to parse the error message. You never did anything with the results of the parsing.

There was a reason, since i did something with the result, which i stated in the second paragraph. The value of the change (positive/negative) determined the direction of the change and based on that a css style which is used to colour the message. This not contrived, but slightly anonymized code i've encountered, written by others.

You think? Read again.

I would like to ask you to look at the original starting post of this node tree and ponder the intent of the message the user is asking the perlmonks about. I am of the opinion that it correlates very closely with what i said.