lua-users home
lua-l archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index] 

于 2014-1-18 0:33, Elias Barrionovo 写道:

On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Andrew Starks <andrew.starks@trms.com> wrote:


Seems like it would be nicer if assert respected __tostring, as error does.
Whenever I think this, someone explains a great answer for it. In three,
two, one...

I always thought assert() called error() internally. Why isn't it the
case? Apart maybe from the stacktrace, isn't the following function
equivalent to assert()?

-- untested
function myAssert(cond, ...)
     if cond then
         return cond, ...
     else
         error(...)
     end
end




IMHO, `assert' and `error' have quite different semantics and use cases.

For me, it is prefered to use `error' together with `pcall/xpcall' to express
the protected (and mostly expectable or recoverable) semantic like the try/catch
constructs of exception handling mechanisms in some other languages.

On the other hand, I would use `assert' to express contracts that must be met,
otherwize it _must_ fail aloud and not expected to be protected or recovered.

So, it is quite reasonable for me that `assert' only accept a string message,
since it is to give the (interactive session) user some clue about what went wrong,
instead of to give `pcall' the `error object' to examine (and maybe to retry or recover)
in a programamtic way, in which case `error' should be used.