From: Stewart Stremler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
(1) They're not accepted as universal, so "best practices" results in a
set of macros to "portably handle exceptions". You don't use try, you
use a MACROPREFIX_TRY, and a MACROPREFIX_END_TRY, and all that stuff...
plus you have to keep track of nested try-catch blocks, and use custom
throw macros, and so forth. It makes the whole exception thing so
useless that you might as well not use it at all, which is, I suspect,
the point.
Umm, what the hell are you talking about? I have *never* seen any such
macros used in C++ code. I have never seen a macro to do try, throw, or
carch ever. And while you can do nested try/catch blocks, you don't need to
do anything special for them. I have no clue where you're coming from here.
(2) You can't get meaningful information from an unknown exception.
Sure, you can "catch ( ... )", which will catch an unknown exception,
but you have absolutely no way of learning anything at all about that
exception. No stack traces for you!
Use an exception base class, and only throw children of that base class.
There you go- meaningful information.
Not that I understand why anyone would *want* exceptions. Exceptions are a
language design flaw.
Gabe
_________________________________________________________________
Play games, earn tickets, get cool prizes. Play nowit's FREE!
http://club.live.com/home.aspx?icid=CLUB_hotmailtextlink1
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
