"Sean Kelly" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]... > Bruno Medeiros Wrote: > >> On 04/12/2010 12:30, Peter Alexander wrote: >> >> I wonder what he means with the "It would be funny if it weren't already >> happening even at the top software companies (how modern are the Google >> coding standards?)". Like, are they banning some stuff from C++ or other >> languages that they perceive as "highbrow" ? > > Exceptions are banned for pragmatic reasons--some of the Google code is > not exception safe and it would be too difficult to change it. I can't > recall the policy on templates offhand.
Yes, and although I don't remember any specifics either, I did notice when I was reading through Google's coding standards that a lot of the advanced C++ features that were banned, were banned for reasons that boil down to notable problems with C++'s version of the feature. In other words, I got the impression that Google would allow most of those things in a langauge that wasn't as sucky as C++. Which reminds me: Has C++ ever gotten the "finally" clause? I'm pretty sure it didn't originally have it. (I don't remember if this is true of Google or not, but if C++, or at least pre-C++1x, doesn't have "finally", then I can definitely imagine a company banning C++ exceptions on those grounds.)
