D
dbeavon
Guest
@Laura, While I know its possible, I would avoid using SEH in legacy code. In general there are other error-handling strategies (as poor as they may be) in place, so that adding one more on top just creates confusion for the legacy ABL coders. (ie. callers of the error-throwing programs would then have to check for two or three different factors to see if an error happened). The declaration of default ON ERROR handling (ON ERROR UNDO, THROW) which you mentioned, is one issue you'd have to address when using SEH in legacy code. Additionally you will force your OO-based error classes on non-OO coders; and they'd have to understand how to catch them properly, how class type inheritance works, how to get at class members within the error classes, and so on. I guess that in practice I don't buy into the idea that SEH should be used in OO *and* non-OO code ABL. As soon as you start using SEH the code becomes, at the very least, OO-aware and you might as well not stop and limit your OO to just your errors.
Continue reading...
Continue reading...