Boost logo

Boost :

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-01-18 11:08:17

At 09:33 AM 1/18/2002, David Abrahams wrote:

>----- Original Message -----
>From: "terekhov" <terekhov_at_[hidden]>
>> > Not really. Sometimes, for example at a 'C' API boundary, you
>> simply have to
>> > use catch(...) so you can prevent an exception from crashing your
>> caller.
>> > Tom Becker has already pointed that out.
>> Perhaps Tom Becker or you could clarify this issue a bit more...
>> (for slowly thinking people, such as me and a couple of my
>> colleagues here)
>If you are writing C++ code that gets called from another language, you
>generally can't let an exception propagate out of your outer-level
>If you don't happen to know the exception, at least you can report /some/
>error. If you don't catch(...), you will crash your caller unless you
>happen to know (a base of) every exception type that can propagate into
>your function.


While I can understand you not wanting to invest the effort of writing a
book on exceptions, please consider some other way of transferring your
knowledge to others.

For example, developing your paper into an exception handling

The FAQ format seems well suited to organic growth. ("Organic" is a
euphemism for unorganized growth:-) You just add to the document as issues
arise. Your answer above gets added under something like "Is catch(...)
without a rethrow ever appropriate?"

Over time, the document grows into something really worthwhile. Far more
valuable that just the sum of the value of its parts.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at