Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #8408

Re: Bug, feature or just accidental?

From boltar2003@boltar.world
Newsgroups comp.lang.c++
Subject Re: Bug, feature or just accidental?
Date 2011-08-02 11:16 +0000
Organization Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID <j18maj$ea1$1@speranza.aioe.org> (permalink)
References (1 earlier) <99psbmFaa6U6@mid.individual.net> <j18j47$6k7$1@speranza.aioe.org> <buo1ux4f6ob.fsf@dhlpc061.dev.necel.com> <j18jtm$8ie$1@speranza.aioe.org> <99q2kbFaa6U8@mid.individual.net>

Show all headers | View raw

On Tue, 02 Aug 2011 22:42:18 +1200
Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On 08/ 2/11 10:35 PM, boltar2003@boltar.world wrote:
>> On Tue, 02 Aug 2011 19:29:08 +0900
>> Miles Bader<miles@gnu.org>  wrote:
>>> The thing is that the parens are _not_ part of the "throw" statement
>>> (the syntax of throw is just "throw SOMETHING" -- note, no parens),
>>> they're just random parens that you can put around any expression.
>>
>> I think Stroustrup missed a trick there. It would be very useful to throw
>> multiple values at the same time instead of having to create an object
>> to hold them in and throw that. Functions arn't limited to a single argument
>> so I don't really see a good reason why throw-catch is.
>
>Think of throw as more like a return statement than a function call and 
>you'll see that argument dose not make sense.

Why not? Plenty of languages allow multiple return values from a function. 
C++ doesn't because its based on C, but thats no reason why a C++ specific
feature such as exceptions couldn't support it.

B2003

Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Bug, feature or just accidental? boltar2003@boltar.world - 2011-08-02 08:49 +0000
  Re: Bug, feature or just accidental? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-02 20:55 +1200
    Re: Bug, feature or just accidental? boltar2003@boltar.world - 2011-08-02 10:21 +0000
      Re: Bug, feature or just accidental? Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> - 2011-08-02 19:29 +0900
        Re: Bug, feature or just accidental? boltar2003@boltar.world - 2011-08-02 10:35 +0000
          Re: Bug, feature or just accidental? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-02 22:42 +1200
            Re: Bug, feature or just accidental? boltar2003@boltar.world - 2011-08-02 11:16 +0000
              Re: Bug, feature or just accidental? Victor Bazarov <v.bazarov@comcast.invalid> - 2011-08-02 08:08 -0400
                Re: Bug, feature or just accidental? boltar2003@boltar.world - 2011-08-02 12:40 +0000
                Re: Bug, feature or just accidental? Victor Bazarov <v.bazarov@comcast.invalid> - 2011-08-02 08:59 -0400
                Re: Bug, feature or just accidental? boltar2003@boltar.world - 2011-08-02 13:23 +0000
                Re: Bug, feature or just accidental? Victor Bazarov <v.bazarov@comcast.invalid> - 2011-08-02 09:43 -0400
                Re: Bug, feature or just accidental? boltar2003@boltar.world - 2011-08-02 13:53 +0000
                Re: Bug, feature or just accidental? James Lothian <james@firstnamelastname.freeserve.co.uk> - 2011-08-03 07:49 +0100
                Re: Bug, feature or just accidental? "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-08-03 10:47 +0100
                Re: Bug, feature or just accidental? Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2011-08-02 15:43 -0500
              Re: Bug, feature or just accidental? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2011-08-02 16:12 +0000
      Re: Bug, feature or just accidental? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-02 22:32 +1200

csiph-web