[PEAK] Rules clarification
Phillip J. Eby
pje at telecommunity.com
Thu Feb 28 10:21:38 EST 2008
At 09:02 AM 2/28/2008 +0200, Sergey Schetinin wrote:
>It also seems that there's some bug triggered by declarations that
>mean nothing, for example:
I wouldn't say it's a bug - your code has an error. Granted, it
would be better to catch it sooner. :)
The problem here is that the default tuple-based engine doesn't have
any code that notices when it has invalid data, which then causes
problems later when you switch to the predicate engine further
below. (The predicate engine will fail immediately if it sees invalid data.)
Adding more sophisticated validation is possible, but I'm a bit
concerned about redundancy, since the additional machinery will exist
only to create errors where none currently occur. :)
More information about the PEAK
mailing list