Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2012 Archives by date, by thread · List index


On 03/21/2012 08:40 AM, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
I think a large part of our hackers, certainly of new ones, might have
more experience of Java than C++. They might think that C++ is more
like Java, and that the throw clauses are crucial to be exactly right
(for some value of "right"), and then waste time. (Or am I completely
confuse?)

Somewhat confused, I'd say. At least if we would utilize standards-compliant compiler environments, exception specifications need to be exactly right, same as in Java. (Though without Java's feature of having this statically checked by the compiler.)

And then there are the hackers (like me) who don't bother to wonder
about it, and pay no attention to whether some function claims to
potentially throw something or not, and just copy boilerplate as they
think necessary when applicable.

This attitude scares me, btw.

Stephan

Context


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.