[Catalyst] Re: Chained and exceptions

Aristotle Pagaltzis pagaltzis at gmx.de
Tue May 14 12:24:48 GMT 2013

* Dimitar Petrov <mitakaa at gmail.com> [2013-05-14 14:05]:
> It was a reply to the whole thread.


> Yeah, we could probably add a warning.

I dunno. I lean toward it but maybe the devs disagree.

> I left it dispatch_on_die  because it's concise with the action role,
> but I guess abort_dispatch_in_chains_on_exception is more meaningful.

I figured… well the action role is an action role, you don’t want to
have to type too much, plus it’s clear when it applies by the fact that
you apply it directly to an action. So a short name is good. But an app-
global setting has to meet higher standards for specificity IMO.

> Any other thoughts?

Nothing else, I did the exact same thing. I dug through the execution
flow of the dispatcher first and found that yes, Bill’s patch is exactly
the right way to add this. (Well, short of the complete, chained-based
refactoring of the dispatcher, in which case I’d do it a different way.)

> If you already have your fork ready or differs from mine either
> discard mine or fork it and add the warning? :)

You have tests, I hadn’t gotten that far yet. I did fork and tweak
Catalyst::Devel to add the config option to the new app boilerplate

Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>

More information about the Catalyst mailing list