On Saturday, 15 June 2013 at 10:08:38 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
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.
That is because you aren't reading what is written. See 2/
Defaulting to ignoring errors and blithely proceeding is not
usually considered a best practice.
I have never written that. That explains 1/
