]> Chris Hecker wrote: > Is the the "right thing" for assert to be caught by a try ... with _ -> > ... block? I don't know. It seems reasonable to have exceptional conditions caught by the exception handler... However, it may be reasonable to ask for more than one exception type--it seems like poor software engineering to statically list *all* the possible reasonable exceptions in a try/with block, except for Assert_failure. This idea will fail as new exceptions are added. To help avoid this problem, in our work we generally declare a type of application errors (not the exact syntax but close enough): type application_error = NoClue | BadIdea of string | IWouldIfICouldButICantSoIWont | ... exception ApplicationError of application_error All raises are of the form (raise (ApplicationError ...)), and the "default" exception handler is (try ... with ApplicationError _ -> ...). This idea works ok, but is not scalable. Jason -- Jason Hickey http://www.cs.caltech.edu/~jyh Caltech Computer Science Tel: 626-395-6568 FAX: 626-792-4257 ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners