On Mon, Feb 23, 2004 at 08:51:36PM +1100, Iain McCoy wrote: > On Mon, 2004-02-23 at 19:37, Michal Moskal wrote: > > This ain't C -- for errors you should get exception, not -1. > Not so. According to microsoft's guidelines, it depends on the error - > if it's an error that you expect to get often, there should be a return > code to indicate it. This is because of the performance cost of > exceptions.
Yes, but not for NetworkStream.Read(). Beside I wonder why exceptions cannot be fast enough. Using exceptions is sometimes very natural way of expression some algorithms, especially in functional languages. I have to benchmark it some day. -- : Michal Moskal :: http://www.kernel.pl/~malekith :: GCS !tv h e>+++ b++ : When in doubt, use brute force. -- Ken Thompson :: UL++++$ C++ E--- a? _______________________________________________ Mono-list maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
