> > Absolutely not! I am saying that it is unreasonable for MS Word to do > > anything other than abort if the user provides a false path in the open > > dialog. What is the programmer supposed to do? > > PMFJI...but I agree with Kristofer. In the case you describe, MS provides > an informational message saying that the file path is invalid and then > offers a suggestion to correct the problem. This type of action does not > require exception handling to accomplish. When you acknowledge the message > with the OK button, the program takes you right to where you left off to try > again.
see my reply to Kristofer.
> I don't think that the need for user intervention automatically means > exception handling. For one thing, I have had to clean up code where the > developer passes the cryptic exception message up to the user, who then has > to call for tech support...and no one wins.
That the message is cryptic doesn't mean that rasing an exception was the wrong thing to do. If it hadn;t been cryptic then perhaps tech support wouldn't have been called.
> Also, I think there are too many cases where info or error message explains > to the user exactly what to do, where instead the program could have done > that task instead. Even in the example above, if you give a program an > invalid path, did the user have the opportunity to input a default path so > that this can be used? Can the MRU be more helpful?
I don;t think either of your suggestions are reasonable for the example I gave. Perhaps in another situation but then that would only be to say that invalid paths are not always a reason for raising exceptions, which I'm not denying.