Hi, > Another argument against replacing Qt's error handling with exceptions is the > following: > In situations where size matters (on embedded platforms - what did you > think...) you can turn off RTTI (and implicitly exception support) and > produce *much* smaller binaries.
That's OK, but you need to ensure that non-exception based error handling actually exists. A number of the template collection methods return void instead of reporting failure - such as resize(), push_back() et al. I'm guessing the API was copied from STL, but those explicitly use exceptions. Maybe Qt5 could return a bool to denote success/failure? If one ignores the return value, the behaviour would be the same as in Qt4. The documentation should probably be updated to explicitly say that Qt does not catch any exceptions thrown by new. Actually, the current class docs don't seem to say anything about handling failure. Steve _______________________________________________ Qt5-feedback mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt5-feedback
