[tmql-wg] Error conditions
rho at bigpond.net.au
Fri Mar 9 03:55:50 EST 2007
On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 01:35:31AM +0100, Lars Marius Garshol wrote:
> (1) Should TMQL specify unambiguously which queries are erroneous?
> (2) Should TMQL name all defined error situations?
> By our requirements we have to do (1), so I assume that's not what
> you mean.
No, of course not. It is (2) whereby I would probably drop the word
> > From a language perspective this is not necessary, but OTOH, it
> > impedes compatibility between TMQL processors as one application
> > has to expect potentially different sets of exceptions.
> Well. What good is a TMQL API that only standardizes the exception
> classes and nothing else? That's effectively what this is.
> > Structured Discussion
> > ? Should the TMQL standard name all error situations
> > + higher compatibility between TMQL implementation
> > - less freedom for implementors
> I think that doing this
> - adds a lot of effort to specifying the language,
A bit, yes. At least we would have a list (maybe 10?, just guessing)
> - causes problems for implementors, because error situations tend to
> be highly dependent on implementation strategy, and
OK, that should actually not happen. If the query is valid, then a
processor MUST perform, regardless how it is implemented.
> In short, I'm strongly in disfavour of this.
Certainly a reasonable position.
More information about the tmql-wg