[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Using exceptions in the core
From: |
Olaf Till |
Subject: |
Re: Using exceptions in the core |
Date: |
Wed, 7 Oct 2015 08:06:33 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) |
On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 11:15:00PM -0400, Mike Miller wrote:
> I still think it's a little weird to say "convert to a string for me,
> here's an error message just in case", is there really no better way?
What occured to me now, though maybe a mad idea and much more work, is
overloading as ..._value (..., bool& err) (somehow avoiding to have
the same signature as the existing functions), and for this variant
not to throw, but to set 'err' to true. This wholly avoids the
try/catch, leaves the user the resposibility to check 'err', but only
in the cases where he explicitely requested it by using this
overloaded variant.
Olaf
--
public key id EAFE0591, e.g. on x-hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
- Re: Using exceptions in the core, John W. Eaton, 2015/10/08
- Re: Using exceptions in the core, Rik, 2015/10/08
- Re: Using exceptions in the core, John W. Eaton, 2015/10/08
- Re: Using exceptions in the core, John W. Eaton, 2015/10/08
- Re: Using exceptions in the core, Mike Miller, 2015/10/08
- Re: Using exceptions in the core, John W. Eaton, 2015/10/08
- Re: Using exceptions in the core, John W. Eaton, 2015/10/08
Re: Using exceptions in the core, Rik, 2015/10/08