Wed Jun 1 15:24:33 CEST 2005
--- "ke.han" <ke.han@REDACTED> wrote:
> I feel like there must have been a better way to
> close in on the error
> than what I did. For example, is there a way to get
> a report when
> another process "throws" an error.
You can monitor other processes with the trace BIF and
the dbg module, though I can't say whether it helps in
> What if I have
> no idea, as in this
> case, how the error was generated..the "error" tuple
> was simply passed
> back to the Client process. Any suggestions?
I'd like more informative exceptions too. I tend to
use my smart_exceptions package (see Jungerl) as a
compiler prepass. This adds module, line number, etc.
to the exception ... but that only helps for code you
have compiled yourself, and, since R10, causes masses
of (useless) warnings from the compiler to boot. The
real solution would be to extend the runtime system,
(Adding some nice way to categorize exceptions would
be useful too. Inheritance, anyone? :-)
Stay in touch with email, IM, photo sharing and more. Check it out!
More information about the erlang-questions