Re: PATCH: Merge objc-improvements-branch to mainline

[M. Grabert]

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Ziemowit Laski wrote:

> On Wednesday, Sep 24, 2003, at 16:55 US/Pacific, Nicolas Roard wrote:
>
> > What I don't understand, is that we _already_ have an exception system,
> > so what was those requests about ?
> > If NS_DURING/NS_HANDLER names scared programmers, well, we could
> > define them as @try ... @catch :-)
> > But I don't see what's so interesting with the new exception system,
> > apart
> > to bring some incompatibilities ...
> > Someone could explain it to me ?
>
> See previous e-mails from Stan and myself. :-)
>
> Which reminds me, I did forget to mention yet 2 more benefits:
> - The exception system will automatically mark variables volatile as
> needed, so that they do not get clobbered by the _setjmp/_longjmp
> interaction.
> - If an exception is not handled by any of your @catch clauses, it is
> automatically propagated up the call chain
>
> All in all, it makes exceptions in ObjC much more accessible to those
> coming from C++ or Java.

Well, as I understand it there is one more benefit:

- it doesn't require an OPENSTEP implementation


But as a user I actually would prefer something like

http://users.pandora.be/stes/block98/index.html

Now THAT's something many users request for objc (just search the gcc-
and GNUstep-mailing lists). I can happily live without @catch and
@throw, but "objc blocks" is something I really like to see in gcc
(in a platform independent implementation).


Thanks, Max