From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <775b8d190611202238o6b5e0cefr98a6ec126bd7bdf0@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 17:38:34 +1100
From: "Bruce Ellis" <bruce.ellis@gmail.com>
To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] read of eof
In-Reply-To: <AC6A4931-280A-439A-98B0-F3EA320E1B76@cibernet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <90aa624e2771b2cc8bf9932b103d0017@coraid.com>
	<AC6A4931-280A-439A-98B0-F3EA320E1B76@cibernet.com>
Topicbox-Message-UUID: e43fc8e8-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

This is crap - we are talking about delimitered messages.

But say what you like, no one listens.

brucee

On 11/21/06, Michael Baldwin <michael@cibernet.com> wrote:
> Obviously, a read of end-of-file should return -42. And if the data
> is possessed, -666.
>
> Seriously, there were two languages that I thought integrated
> exceptions / failures well enough that you could actually use them
> all the time pleasantly: Icon and Mesa. System calls (or expressions)
> would "fail" instead of return in-band values, and the syntactic
> sugar was light enough on calories that you didn't have the sense
> that you were dragging out an exception handling harness with whipped
> cream on top all the time just for one little call.
>
> Ah well.
>
>