Re: fun with eval-d

• Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 13:40:17 PST
• From:
  Pavel Curtis <pavel@parc.xerox.com>
• cc: moo-cows.PARC@xerox.com
• In-Reply-to: "asb@media.mit.edu's message of \"Thu, 09 Nov 1995 15:27:44 PST\" <9511092327.AA00727@kilpikonna.media.mit.edu>com w"

Amy writes:
> ;me.temp = {1, 2, 3}
> => {1, 2, 3}
> >eval-d me.temp[5] = 5
> => 5
> >;me.temp
> => E_RANGE  (Range error)
> 
> Wouldn't it be more intuitive if the eval-d expression returned the value
> E_RANGE, but left the property's value unchanged?  Right now it actually sets
> the property me.temp's value to E_RANGE.

Quite so.  Consider this fixed in 1.8.0, where you could simply stop using !d
verbs and use the new error-handling primitives instead.

	Pavel

• fun with eval-d
• From: asb@media.mit.edu

• Prev: fun with eval-d
• Next: Funded PhD studentship available
• Index: MOO-cows
• Thread: MOO-cows