Pavel Tsekov wrote: > Just chaging exit() -> throw Exception won't help much. There should > be > an exception handler installed who takes care of processing these > exceptions i.e. shutdown setup with a simple message describing the > situation.
Yes, thats the next step. > If you going to do this I suggest you to dereive a new class from > exception or Exception, say FatalException. Then install a global > handler, which catches FatalException and displays a message then > exits. This way the exit call will be in a single place and not > scattered throught the code. All exceptions are fatal if they get to the toplevel. Unfortunately, we will require multiple toplevel catch blocks: One in each WndProc and thread initiation routine. > Btw why do you want to use a single exception type ? IMO, this way you > defeat the purpose of exceptions to a certain degree. Different > exceptions should cover different types of errors/events - say > IOException, CRCExcepion, AuthenticationException. Makes sense. I'll wait for Robert to explain why setup has 2 different exception paradigms, and which one can be removed, and if we keep Exception, whether we can junk appErrNo, and replace it with derived classes as you suggest. Max.
