From -5302630757420494146 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f78e5,96a8c01f7043c2d9 X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-09-27 21:36:23 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!kibo.news.demon.net!mutlu.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!devnull From: francis.glassborow@ntlworld.com (Francis Glassborow) Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: Proposal: exception stack unwinding resumption Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 04:36:22 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Southfield Microcomputer SS Lines: 37 Approved: fjh@cs.mu.oz.au (Fergus Henderson , moderator of comp.std.c++) Message-ID: References: <6df0c6a8.0208260746.633710cb@posting.google.com> <6df0c6a8.0209201925.6faa9e57@posting.google.com> <6df0c6a8.0209230602.2aba3ca8@posting.google.com> <6df0c6a8.0209240716.6fb5ec00@posting.google.com> <6df0c6a8.0209261901.36511fd8@posting.google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=us-ascii;format=flowed X-Trace: mail2news.demon.co.uk 1033187782 10156 10.0.0.1 (28 Sep 2002 04:36:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 04:36:22 +0000 (UTC) X-Received: from mulga.cs.mu.oz.au ([128.250.1.22]) by news.demon.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17v9L2-0002cv-00 for mail2news@news.news.demon.net; Sat, 28 Sep 2002 04:36:20 +0000 X-Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU id OAA12600; Sat, 28 Sep 2002 14:36:09 +1000 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU: fjh set sender to devnull@stump.algebra.com using -f X-Path: comp-std-cpp-robomod!not-for-mail X-Robomod: STUMP, ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov) X-Delivered-To: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu X-Reply-To: Francis Glassborow X-Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ X-User-Agent: Turnpike/6.01-U () Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.std.c++:14284 In article <6df0c6a8.0209261901.36511fd8@posting.google.com>, Pierre Baillargeon writes >francis.glassborow@ntlworld.com (Francis Glassborow) wrote in message news:... >> >> I maintain that any dtor that _needs_ to throw is perverting the >> semantics of destructors. If it does not need to throw then it should >> not do so under any circumstances. > >I respect your opinion and design choices, but is this a valid reason >to actively resists having the C++ language support those that would >like to write such code? > >Many things about C++ bother many people, yet the language doesn't >force anything down anyone's throat. My proposal doesn't force you to >use destructors that throw, and its formulation should not incur any >cost if your destructor don't throw. So what is the harm? There is a big difference between allowing people to shoot themselves in the foot and going to the trouble of constructing a new weapon whose only purpose is foot shooting :-) The harm is that pursuing this will cost many people a lot of time, that means that there needs to be real benefits. -- Francis Glassborow ACCU 64 Southfield Rd Oxford OX4 1PA +44(0)1865 246490 All opinions are mine and do not represent those of any organisation --- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ] [ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ] [ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ] [ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html ]