>>>>>>Hi, one thing I will love to see in Sedna is Try/Catch working on SPT functions instead of using Aerror(). It will be good if TRY/CATCH traps all kind of errors.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Luis
>>>>>
>>>>>Nice. Nicer would be if TRY/CATCH could trap all errors.
>>>>>Cetin
>>>>
>>>>I don't agree here.
>>>>ODBC, COM, Files access are external operations
>>>>
>>>>and it is very better if they return a state.
>>>>
>>>>You considers an async ODBC fetching,
>>>>that fails during the fetch in backgroud,
>>>>where is the CATCH that it captures the error?
>>>>
>>>>A mixed model is very confused.
>>>>
>>>>Different discourse the is implemented all with mechanisms of multithread callbacks,
>>>>but this is far years light from VFP.
>>>>
>>>>Fabio
>>>
>>>I might want that. Try/Catch is not mandatory. There are cases where I'd like a try/catch.
>>>Cetin
>>
>>I would prefer that they integrated Error() in the stack of the TRY so that
>>VPF accept a THROW or a ERROR into the Error event.
>
>Might be. Honestly I'm not a fan of Try/Catch.
>Cetin

It has some positive aspects (FINALLY is good),
but a lot of things have not been made well or they are incomplete.

For instance, if in a stack of 20 calls
you have to try at level 3 and it is verified an error,
in the exception object there is no trace of the path of the
17 underlying levels, so the debug of a log
it becomes impossible.

This implementation in a language OOP as VFP
it is a disaster.