[erlang-questions] string:substr/2 gives confusing error message

[Bengt Kleberg]

Greetings,

Is not ``0 div N = 0'' an error for N equal to 0?


bengt

On Fri, 2008-12-05 at 16:36 +0200, Valentin Micic wrote:
> The way I see it, you’re doing a right thing – returning an empty
> string. It is just a matter of covering another pattern: substr( [],
> N ) -> []. Unless you want to argue that 0 div N = 0 is an error? J
> 
>  
> 
> V.
> 
>  
> 
>                                    
> ______________________________________________________________________
> From: Robert Virding [mailto:rvirding@REDACTED] 
> Sent: 05 December 2008 03:51 PM
> To: Valentin Micic
> Cc: Vlad Dumitrescu; erlang-questions
> Subject: Re: [erlang-questions] string:substr/2 gives confusing error
> message
> 
> 
>  
> 
> I think in cases like this you will find that the person who wrote the
> module (me most likely) was just trying to be kind and return
> something "sensible" if the arguments are of the right type and not
> too crazy. Like asking for more characters from a list than exists.
> 
> I have now thought this over and come to the conclusion that you
> probably shouldn't be kind but generate an error in these situations.
> Being kind will often come back and bite you later in an unpleasant
> way.
> 
> I personally don't see any problem with a function_clause error as
> these means that there was a bad argument. It could be helpful if the
> error came from the function which is called, but as long as it comes
> from a function which is cleary related to the call, as in this case,
> I don't worry about it.
> 
> How to return errors is a difficult problem. If you catch them at a
> higher level how do you then return a helpful error? And helpful fo
> whom?
> 
> Robert
> 
> 2008/12/5 Valentin Micic <v@REDACTED>
> 
> I think that depends how you want to look at it...
> One may argue that
>        string:substr([], 2 )
> does not make much sense as a statement, but then, I'd say that:
>        string:substr("1", 2 )
> does not make to much sense either, and yet it returns [].
> IMO, both functions should behave the same way, and to be pragmatic,
> return
> an empty list (not a badarg exception).
> 
> V.
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: erlang-questions-bounces@REDACTED
> [mailto:erlang-questions-bounces@REDACTED] On Behalf Of Vlad
> Dumitrescu
> Sent: 05 December 2008 12:12 PM
> To: erlang-questions
> Subject: [erlang-questions] string:substr/2 gives confusing error
> message
> 
> Hi!
> 
> Calling string:substr/2 with erroneous arguments gives a
> non-informative error message
> 
> (w@REDACTED)1> string:substr([], 2).
> ** exception error: no function clause matching string:substr2([],2)
> 
> Shouldn't it be badarg instead, or something similar?
> 
> Also, the strings module documentation doesn't mention what are the
> cases when the function will fail. (A quick glance shows that there
> are other functions in the same situation).
> 
> best regards,
> Vlad
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://www.erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
> 
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://www.erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://www.erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions