On 6/15/2013 3:04 AM, deadalnix wrote:
On Saturday, 15 June 2013 at 09:48:59 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 6/15/2013 1:36 AM, deadalnix wrote:
The solution that consist into flushing in main at the end of the program is
problematic as well. At this point, from programmer perspective, the program ran
fun and is terminated successfully. Still the whole stuff will explode under its
feet, in the runtime. That isn't something we should promote.
If the output failed to happen, how could the program have successfully
behaved as intended?
From programmer's perspective.
I'm sorry, that makes no sense to me. In fact, this thread started out reporting
an article by a programmer who was unhappy that the program exited normally but
the output didn't happen.
Defaulting to ignoring errors and blithely proceeding is not usually considered
a best practice.
