James G. Sack (jim) wrote:
I would be happier with "catch unexpected behavior and do something
"sensible" .. but maybe that's what you meant by "fix it".
Yes. I meant that in some languages, for example, if you run out of
memory, the program just aborts. C++ does do a nice job of (for example)
unwinding constructors in a logical order when you run out of memory in
the middle of a constructor.
Of course, your OS can still screw you up, like back when Linux would
let you allocate nonexistent memory and then just kill -9 you when you
tried to use it. (Which was fixed pretty quickly after, I'll note. :-)
You run off an array in C++, or free something twice, and you're in
trouble, tho.
..and, I would add that "exceptions" should probably get reviewed rather
than be buried or ignored. Especially "unexpected exceptions" <heh>.
If the language was actually well-defined, it would make for a pretty
nice language for all kinds of things, methinks.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
His kernel fu is strong.
He studied at the Shao Linux Temple.
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
