[boost] Re: Re: improved assertions?

From: Hendrik Schober (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-06-21 06:29:12

"Ted Byers" <r.ted.byers_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> [...]
> However, my base exception also allows for the user (the programmers' using
> code) to set a custom message for each place where an exception can be
> thrown.  so you could have something like:
> 
> void f(void) {
>   ERROR_STACKTRACE_BEGIN
>   static std::string msg;
>   static const std::string msgA("Here");
>   msg = msgA;
>   bool rcA = Herefunction();
> ...
>   static const std::string msgB("There");
>   bool rcB = ThereFunction();
> ...
>   ERROR_STACKTRACE_END
> };
> 
> This allows a finer granularity in knowing where the exception came from
> without having to give each statement its own try/catch block.

  I don't see the need for this. You can always put 
  more of these macros into your code, if you want 
  better granularity: 

    void f()
    {
      ERROR_STACKTRACE_BEGIN {
        doSomething()
        ERROR_STACKTRACE_BEGIN {
          doMore();
        } ERROR_STACKTRACE_END
        ERROR_STACKTRACE_BEGIN {
          doEvenMore();
        } ERROR_STACKTRACE_END
          doYetMore();
      } ERROR_STACKTRACE_END
    }

  This gets you rid of the string/resource problem. 

> [...]
> So then, when the CPU raises a signal that a floating point error has
> occured, we have to wait for the OS (Windows) to convert it into an OS
> exception we can then catch?  Or have I misunderstood what is happening when
> an invalid floating point exception is produced by the OS?

  SEHs are a MS thing. The standard way to do this is signals. 
  But within a signal handler you can't do much except setting 
  an (atomic) flag. 
  I don't know much about the details of SEH, but I think these 
  exceptions are synchronous. But I really don't knwo that. 

> Cheers,
> 
> Ted
> [...]

  Schobi