RE: [boost] Re: Threads by Jeremy and Monitors in one?

From: Reid Sweatman (borderland_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-08-11 17:47:29

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Abrahams [mailto:abrahams_at_[hidden]]
> Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 6:05 AM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] Re: Threads by Jeremy and Monitors in one?

> "Expectedness" is a poor measure of whether an exception is the
> appropriate
> response, IMO. In some sense, any error you can write recovery code for is
> "expected". The criterion to use is "will the caller almost certainly want
> to handle the condition locally, or is stack unwinding more
> likely to be the
> desired behavior?"

Okay, I'll buy that...but I'll have to think about it a bit.  It's not the
criterion I was taught to use.  But I'm aware that there's more than one
school of thought on when to use exceptions, and what you say makes sense,
except that there's often legitimate uses for exceptions that don't involve
stack unwinding and in which the exception is handled locally.  Me go back
to hut and make sacrifice; maybe understand in morning <g>.

Reid Sweatman