[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: bug: Error handling in source blocks.
From: |
tomas |
Subject: |
Re: bug: Error handling in source blocks. |
Date: |
Wed, 11 Aug 2021 08:23:03 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 06:30:26AM +1000, Tim Cross wrote:
> [...] For example, in an
> interpreted language, you could have errors due to problems with the
> interpreter, you could have errors in the code or you could have a code
> block which legitimately returns an error [...]
Yes, your error might be my nugget. For one illustrative example, I
once cobbled up a small shell tutorial. Babel seemed like the right
thing -- but I needed script snippets erroring out to show off.
Needless to say, Babel freaked out, not only on non-zero exit codes,
but also on any hint of activity on stderr.
I cheated myself out with preambles and postambles, which redirected
stderr to stdout and lied about exit codes.
This is, of course, horribly ugly, because it's language-specific
(you'd have to do it for C or Scheme or Perl or...), although the
concepts of exit code and stderr are OS wide. We could do better :)
Just one data point.
Cheers
- t
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature