Re: some questions on PEAR_Error usage

On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 09:31:14AM -0400, Stig Sæther Bakken wrote: | [Steven Haryanto <steven@haryan.to>] | > | > 1. Should I create my own "exception" type subclassing from | > PEAR_Error. [...] | | Normally you won't need to subclass PEAR_Error. The cases I can think | of is where you only want the concept of an error code (like in DB), | or if you want to report a lot of extra information. Yes, indeed. E.g. I like being able to see a kind of call stack that led to an error, and have done some crude and ugly subclassing of PEAR_Error to accomplish this in the past. Has anyone else experimented with this and arrived at a clean-ish solution? -- Øyvind Møll oyvindmo@initio.no