[elcritch]

The sound of it makes me think or Erlang's OTP system. I've just been really digging into it lately. Though the stack walking seems different, the entire OTP system is wonderful in letting you deal with errors by composing restartable processes and supervisors.

Heck, it's easier to handle recovering from an error by just restarting a process and letting it follow the normal unit logic.

Do have any knowledge of how CL and Erlang/Elixir/OTP are similar or vary on error handling?

[mikelevins]

Common Lisp's restarts are not restartable processes in the Erlang sense. They are part of a facility for suspending execution of a thread of control when it encounters an error, modifying the dynamic state of the process during the suspension, and resuming execution afterward.

When an error occurs in a Common Lisp program the runtime signals a __condition__. A condition is an instance of a class that represents unexpected or otherwise exceptional situations that can arise during execution. When a condition is signaled, control searches for a registered handler that matches the type of the signaled condition. If one is found then control passes to the matching handler. If none is found then control passes to the default handler, which by default starts an interactive repl called a breakloop__.

The breakloop has access to the full dynamic state of the suspended computation, including all local and dynamic variables and all pending functions on the stack. From the breakloop a programmer can alter variable values and redefine functions and classes. For example, if you conclude that the error happened because of an incorrect function definition, you can redefine the function and tell the breakloop to resume execution as if the new definition had been called instead of the original one.

A __restart__ in this context is an option for continuing execution. Common Lisp's condition system offers the programmer the ability to choose from among available restarts in a breakloop, or to write a handler that will make the choice automatically when a condition is signaled, and it also offers the ability to define custom restarts.

[didibus]

I've been wanting to experiment with this. There are some libraries in Clojure that try, but it seems that the real value is the interactivity of it while developing? I haven't found the exception handlers to really add much value over normal exception handling at least in Clojure.

[guicho271828]

As an interesting example, conditions and restarts can be used to implement an interactive system that is composable with other programs. For instance, you can implement a simple y/n question handler as follows:

    (defun fn1 ()
      (if (yes-or-no-p) (print :yes) (print :no)))
    
    (defun fn2 ()
      (fn1))

[yes-or-no-p](http://clhs.lisp.se/Body/f_y_or_n.htm) is an interactive function that reads from the stdin. However, you cannot programatically answer "yes" to fn1, as other functions in the call stack (fn2) has no way to know that fn1 halts because it waits for the input from the stdin. Instead, a condition system allows this:

    (defun fn1 ()
      (restart-case (error "yes or no?")
        (yes () (print :yes))
        (no  () (print :no))))
    
    (defun fn2-interactive ()
      (fn1))

    (defun fn2-automated ()
      (hander-bind ((error (lambda (c) (invoke-restart 'yes)))) ;; handler
         (fn1)))

When you call fn2-automated, an error is signaled, handled by the handler, which invokes a restart 'yes, then :yes is printed. Interactivity is still maintained by fn2-interactive.

[didibus]

I'm not sure I get it. Where is the user io in the second example? I'm not sure I understand how fn2-interactive still works.

[guicho271828]

It enters the debugger due to the error. In the debugger menu you see additional entries YES and NO.

    yes or no?
       [Condition of type SIMPLE-ERROR]
    
    Restarts:
     0: [YES] YES
     1: [NO] NO
     2: [RETRY] Retry SLIME REPL evaluation request.
     3: [*ABORT] Return to SLIME's top level.
     4: [ABORT] abort thread (#<THREAD "repl-thread" RUNNING                 {1003167FA3}>)

See? All debugger menus are actually implemented as the restarts, set up at various call stacks. In this implementation of the debugger the way to select YES is to enter 0 or click it on the emacs buffer. In another debugger, it could be entering ":r 0" to the stdin. You can also implement your debugger function, which `read-line` the input stream and only recognizes a specific string, y or n, and set your function to `debugger-hook` to use it (I forgot to mention this in the above example).

[didibus]

Ok right. That's why I feel in Clojure it doesn't provide as much, because it doesn't hook into a debugger.

Having said that, practically, you wouldn't release a tool which has users interact at the debugger, at least for any level of more serious commercial work no?