dub: should we make it the de jure package manager for D?

[Jacob Carlborg]

On 2013-09-12 15:37, H. S. Teoh wrote:

> Well, you may be right, but at the time I was working on a YUI-based
> framework, and I discovered that either YUI, or the way the framework
> initializes YUI (I didn't write the base framework code so I don't know
> for sure), has some kind of default exception-catching code that catches
> such exceptions and then proceeds to *ignore* it. It does terminate the
> current execution thread, mind you, but all the other event handlers and
> hooks are still active, and the rest of the code attached to them will
> continue running despite the fact that something has catastrophically
> failed. Which, of course, means that now some object(s) are in an
> invalid state due to the previous failure, but the code is completely
> unaware of this situation and continue barging ahead and doing stuff,
> until it encounters the bad objects, and then random failures happen
> (which all get swallowed by the default catcher, thus promulgating the
> problem).
>
> But either way, the behaviour is equally bad. If JS stops executing upon
> encountering an exception, then you just randomly get a blank page (when
> the bug is triggered) with no helpful indication whatsoever what went
> wrong. If it continues executing, then you get random failures for no
> apparent reason. Both are equally hard to debug, and both could've been
> avoided had JS had *sane* handling of errors in the first place.

Absolutely, I agree. I have seen JavaScript errors on Github from time 
to time. But it seems like everything continue to work as expected.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg