New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Fix #9136 - inconsistent handling of exception return #9137
Fix #9136 - inconsistent handling of exception return #9137
Conversation
Hi,
and
really are two distinct operations (and probably should remain as such). They are equivalent in Pharo thanks to their current implementation. I'm closing the PR. |
Hi @isCzech I am more convinced with your example that your proposal is correct. |
Thanks @dionisiydk for your feedback, I've done some more testing and realized there will be a problem with Exception>> #outer - I'll come up with a test showing it later - so the "fix" probably wouldn't be as simple as I suggested. Besides, as Stephane writes in Deep into Pharo (2013, p. 278), ANSI is not clear regarding the potential difference - or equivalence - between the two. What happened is I'd experimented with a modification of #return and realized the implicit return (or abandon as it's referred to in Deep Into Pharo) will become different from #return :) |
Hi @dionisiydk , you were right, my bad - I got confused and the suggested modification works well with #outer. I'm reopening the PR for your consideration :) Sorry for the confusion. Thanks |
I suggest that we keep this one for Pharo 10 because we really want to make sure that we do not have changes that can shake to o much the system. Pharo 90 should have been out in April. :( |
Hi all, it's been really difficult to review the batch of issues (#8567 , #8845, #9137, #8993, #8509). @tesonep is correctly (!!) proposing to my ear that we make a single PR joining all of them to reduce the merge noise, let the CI test the combination of all issues. I then propose that we eagerly merge this (meta) PR and be ready to quickly apply hot-fixes as soon as possible or revert it in case of fire. Thoughts? @dionisiydk @Ducasse @isCzech @estebanlm |
Superseeded by #10429 |
Fixes #9136