From: E. Gladyshev (egladysh_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-11-03 19:14:46
--- Alexander Terekhov <terekhov_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> They'll all work just fine as long as your program is "correct" (read:
> nothing unexpected can be thrown, each and every swallowed exception
> is really-really meant to be swallowed, stack overflow and all other
> "hardware exceptions" aren't meant to be catchable by "the C++ catch"
> and so forth).
That would be great. How do we ensure that the above is true?
> Worth Worrying About. Think positive, so to speak. ;-)
I just want to find out what is the right thing to do
in catch(...) clauses? Part of my job is concerned
with controlling s/w and it is important to figure out
what to do in cases like this. (no matter how
positive you want to be:)). It seems that basic guarantees
can be of a big help here, but the evil is in details.
The task becomes more complicated because some
of the libraries including boost libraries
would just throw undefined exceptions with 'throw;'.
Do you Yahoo!?
Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk