Comment by 🚀 stack

=> Re: "The Wall CGI - source published" | In: u/stack

More seriously, failure here is not a problem:

• If unescaping fails, we return and the page shows no data;

• No writing is done unless the message is parsed;

• If the file is missing, a new one is created;

• If the file is not readable or writeable, it will not be read or written.

• If a read fails, we will show partially-read data, or nothing.

I know that we are taught to obsess over error checking, but in many cases it is just unnecessary.

If something does not work, it is better to plan for it and do something useful -- or nothing at all -- than have a significant chunk of your time and your code be dedicated to error messages that no one should see if you do things right.

=> 🚀 stack [OP]

2024-06-10 · 8 months ago

1 Later Comment

=> ☕️ Morgan · 2024-06-11 at 06:30:

Yes. Checked exceptions were, in my opinion, one of Java's few design level mishaps ... so much development time wasted on try / catch / throw :)

Anyone remember SQLException? It remembers you...

Original Post

=> 🚀 stack | — tilde.cafe/~spellbinding/wall/cgi

The Wall CGI - source published — I added the C sources for my Wall CGI. It is an example of a minimal CGI - compiles to 14KB, minimal execution footprint, and the data is limited to 64KB max (old messages will be truncated). My Wall (link above) has been running for about a year alongside SpellBinding. Scribble a message if you feel like it.

=> 💬 4 comments · 2024-06-10 · 8 months ago