The argument sits there. function handle(int $cmd, ...$arg) : int /* throw */ function !handle(int $cmd, ...$arg) : int
On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 10:10 AM M. W. Moe <mo.mu....@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > yes this is very true, but still foreign to the language construct; empty > contextual indicators it's what > we usually do in C and assembly (it has no cost) especially on extra > sensitive code to make it short. > > On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 10:00 AM Claude Pache <claude.pa...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> >> >> > Le 3 avr. 2019 à 18:52, M. W. Moe <mo.mu....@gmail.com> a écrit : >> > >> > Hello, >> > >> > not documenting at first is not really a question of laziness or so, as >> > things are still moving around >> > you absolutely need this agility; a good design layout between theory >> and >> > stable state will refactored >> > discussed a thousand times; that what I expect from engineers; filling >> the >> > gaps between assumptions >> > and reality. >> > >> > And for me-self throw vs no throw is important language information and >> > part of internal behaviors; >> > to clarify, for instance, would be more useful to have such indicator >> > rather than having having >> > abstract and interface which are cumbersome; same as the extra public >> > keyword; you can do without >> > especially with the new traits construct. >> > >> > Best. >> >> If you’re unwilling to write a docblock for some good reason, why not >> just use the built-in, user-extensible way that most programming languages >> have to add annotations without runtime effect, namely unstructured >> comments? Something like /* nothrow */ is both forward- and >> backward-compatible... Am I missing something? >> >> —Claude >> >>
