On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 09:45, Frode V. Fjeld frode@netfonds.no wrote:
Hans Hübner -> Edi Weitz
You were the one who convinced me that *break-on-signals* is all you need, and who am I to dissent? :P
Just as an apropos to the discussion: I just had the cunning idea to use an around method on process-request to set up some dynamic variables that were initially unbound, and with a handler-bind that would compute the init-forms upon first use of the variable, thus only computing the bindings' init-forms when they are actually required. The *break-on-signals* approach would not mix well with this technique.
To continue flogging a dead horse: I consented with the removal of the hunchentoot specific debugging mechanism because I still have something of a C++ mindset, part of which is considering exception handling as being exclusively for error handling. In C++, exception handling has undefined performance characteristics, which is why it is considered bad style to use it in non-error circumstances. In Lisp, performance is generally not that well-defined, and it is generally more open to multiple styles and paradigms, so restricting the use of signals to genuine error handling is much less sensible.
So: Apologies :)