On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 01:45:54AM +0900, Daniel Berger wrote:
> > A bare "rescue" doesn't catch all exceptions, only those which are
> > subclasses of StandardError. Change to:
> >
> >   rescue Exception
> 
> Given how often this issue appears on the mailing list, I'm beginning
> to think that a bare rescue should just rescue Exception. That seems
> to be what most people expect it to do.
> 
> Is there a downside to this idea?

Well, it would be very confusing if a rescue intended to catch an
invalid-data sort of error also caught an invalid program error (such as a
"method missing" exception caused by a typo in a method name). At best,
these would end up finding their way into a log somewhere. At worst, they
would be silently ignored, making debugging very difficult.