On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 00:21:47 +0300, grauzone <[email protected]> wrote:
BCS wrote:
Hello grauzone,
PS: I wonder, should the runtime really execute finally blocks if an
"Error" exception is thrown? (Errors are for runtime errors, Exception
for normal exceptions.) Isn't it dangerous to execute arbitrary user
code in presence of what is basically an internal error?
If a thrown Error doesn't run finally blocks you will have a very hard
time arguing for catch working and once those don't happen it might as
well kill -9 the process so why even have it in the first place?
You still can use a "catch (Throwable t)" to catch all kinds of errors.
I just think that finally (and scope(exit)) should be designed with high
level code in mind. Code that allocates heap memory in a finally block
is already broken (what if an out of memory error was thrown?).
I've seen code that has throws new OutOfMemoryException(__FILE__,
__LINE__); when malloc (or other allocation mechanism) has failed, and it
always make me smile.
QtD did just that last time I've checked.
