|
From: Kris K. <kat...@gm...> - 2018-05-30 19:06:07
|
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 08:57:13AM -0700, Raymond Toy wrote: > I think your approach is good. Thanks for taking the time to look at this. > An alternative approach, which is a lot more work, is to return two > values like cl::ignore-errors. If there are no errors, return the > (multiple) values of the form. If there is an error, return nil and a > second value that is the error condition. This means updating all the > call sites to handle this case, though, and that might not be > desirable. Yeah, I think something like this would be better overall since we're in CL and have multiple values. Maybe another time :-) Cheers, Kris Katterjohn |