From 5624464379675835908 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f78e5,96a8c01f7043c2d9 X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-09-17 16:08:42 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!212.74.64.35!colt.net!kibo.news.demon.net!mutlu.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!devnull From: pierrebai@hotmail.com (Pierre Baillargeon) Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: Proposal: exception stack unwinding resumption Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 23:08:41 +0000 (UTC) Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 40 Approved: fjh@cs.mu.oz.au (Fergus Henderson , moderator of comp.std.c++) Message-ID: <6df0c6a8.0209170602.2cb54634@posting.google.com> References: <6df0c6a8.0208260746.633710cb@posting.google.com> <6df0c6a8.0209051026.5df687db@posting.google.com> <6df0c6a8.0209100534.619b8531@posting.google.com> <6df0c6a8.0209121133.6f081c37@posting.google.com> <23b84d65.0209161107.23bea618@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: mail2news.demon.co.uk 1032304121 28459 10.0.0.1 (17 Sep 2002 23:08:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 23:08:41 +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 17rRSR-0007Os-00 for mail2news@news.news.demon.net; Tue, 17 Sep 2002 23:08:40 +0000 X-Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU id JAA13471; Wed, 18 Sep 2002 09:08:06 +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-Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ X-NNTP-Posting-Date: 17 Sep 2002 14:02:20 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.std.c++:13983 Allan_W@my-dejanews.com (Allan W) wrote in message news:<23b84d65.0209161107.23bea618@posting.google.com>... > > Garry Lancaster: > > ... Frankly, I'm starting to find this thread pointless. All replies go along the same lines: it's dangerous to throw from destructors, so don't do anything in destructors. No one considers the alternative: if it were not dangerous to throw from destructors we could do useful things in destructors. All suggestions always have to do with putting the header/footer pair in a function with the body either a virtual function or templated. They all fail to address the usability problems. The usability problems are: - Having to put code in a separate function/object/class. - Not having access to local variables. - Spreading the code in many places, making it harder to read/understand. - One-use code forced to be put in a reusable function/object/class. - Harder to nest multiple levels of arbitrary headers/footers. Some claim that the destructor will somehow corrupt the data, but it can be avoided *easily* with a single if. I don't only because I don't need that capability. The need is simple: have an automated, reusable and usable way to have a pair of functions called around a piece of code. As far as claim to abuse of the RAII name, I agree, but the concepts are related: RAII is a specialized subset of the other, only taking resources into consideration. --- [ 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 ]