Yes, the problem is with a library I'm using, and no, I cannot modify it. I need a workaround.
Basically, I'm dealing with a badly written Perl library, that exits with 'die' when a certain error condition is encountered reading a file. I call this routine from a program which is looping through thousands of files, a handful of which are bad. Bad files happen; I just want my routine to log an error and move on.
IF I COULD modify the library, I would simply change the
die "error";
to a
print "error";return;
, but I cannot. Is there any way I can couch the routine so that the bad files won't crash the entire process?
FOLLOWUP QUESTION: Using an "eval" to couch the crash-prone call works nicely, but how do I set up handling for catch-able errors within that framework? To describe:
I have a subroutine that calls the library-which-crashes-sometimes many times. Rather than couch each call within this subroutine with an eval{}, I just allow it to die, and use an eval{} on the level that calls my subroutine:
my $status=eval{function($param);};
unless($status){print $@; next;}; # print error and go to next file if function() fails
However, there are error conditions that I can and do catch in function(). What is the most proper/elegant way to design the error-catching in the subroutine and the calling routine so that I get the correct behavior for both caught and uncaught errors?
You could wrap it in an eval
. See:
perldoc -f eval
For instance, you could write:
# warn if routine calls die
eval { routine_might_die }; warn $@ if $@;
This will turn the fatal error into a warning, which is more or less what you suggested. If die
is called, $@
contains the string passed to it.