Re: [tap] Parse error vs failure

Steffen Schwigon <ss5@renormalist.net> Sun, 01 February 2009 00:58 UTC

Return-Path: <tap-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: tap-archive@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-tap-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 381633A686D; Sat, 31 Jan 2009 16:58:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: tap@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tap@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F257B3A686D for <tap@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 31 Jan 2009 16:58:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kGUhenvkmoOJ for <tap@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 31 Jan 2009 16:58:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from h132974.serverkompetenz.net (renormalist.net [81.169.141.46]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E1413A6A8D for <tap@ietf.org>; Sat, 31 Jan 2009 16:58:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ss5 by h132974.serverkompetenz.net with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <ss5@renormalist.net>) id 1LTQfQ-0005g2-Fz for tap@ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2009 01:58:32 +0100
To: tap@ietf.org
References: <4984B200.6060907@pobox.com> <20090131213720.GB30031@klangraum.plasmasturm.org> <4984F0E4.8090001@plusthree.com>
From: Steffen Schwigon <ss5@renormalist.net>
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 01:58:32 +0100
In-Reply-To: <4984F0E4.8090001@plusthree.com> (Michael Peters's message of "Sat, 31 Jan 2009 19:46:28 -0500")
Message-ID: <87pri3vupz.fsf@renormalist.net>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) XEmacs/21.4.19 (linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [tap] Parse error vs failure
X-BeenThere: tap@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Test Anything Protocol WG discussions <tap.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tap>, <mailto:tap-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/tap>
List-Post: <mailto:tap@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tap-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tap>, <mailto:tap-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: tap-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: tap-bounces@ietf.org

Michael Peters <mpeters@plusthree.com> writes:
> Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote:
>> * Michael G Schwern <schwern@pobox.com> [2009-01-31 21:20]:
>>> Generally prefer failure-with-warning over parse error for
>>> valid but sort of nonsense output?
>> Basically. I think we should differentiate between syntactical
>> and semantic errors.
>
> I agree. Syntax errors should be parse errors, but semantic errors should be failure-with-warning.

+1 Me too.

Steffen
-- 
Steffen Schwigon <ss5@renormalist.net>
Dresden Perl Mongers <http://dresden-pm.org/>
German Perl-Workshop 2009 <http://www.perl-workshop.de/en/2009>
_______________________________________________
tap mailing list
tap@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tap