[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: exception systems

Alas, Kent Pitman wrote:

> I feel as if calling this a ball of mud is a way of saying that it's
> ok to be sloppy about the outcome, or it's not necessary to do your
> homework about what's been done already because probably it won't
> measure up to your high standards anyway, and it's ok to just make up
> ideas on the fly and assert that they're better than what's been done
> before.

I'm sorry you feel this way, Kent.  Your feelings don't seem
to have any connection to what I was saying, however.

Someone (Alan Perlis?) once said that APL is like a beautiful
crystal:  It looks great, but if you try to add anything to
it you destroy the symmetries that make it beautiful.  Lisp,
on the other hand, is a ball of mud.  It looks ugly, but you
can add stuff to it without changing its character.

When I used that metaphor, I was saying that an exception
system needs to be extensible: a ball of mud, not a diamond.

I can't really believe that you disagree with me on this.

> I want to applaud both Richard Kelsey and Dan Friedman...

Clap, clap!  No disagreement here.

>  ...To the extent that [Kelsey's] proposals have
> been insufficient, I'd like to see an example of a program you want to
> be able to write and why it is hard to write in his system in order to
> focus discussion.

Kelsey's recent proposal did not arrive here until after I had
sent my previous messages.  I will post my technical questions
in a separate message.