Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #8409
| From | Victor Bazarov <v.bazarov@comcast.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c++ |
| Subject | Re: Bug, feature or just accidental? |
| Date | 2011-08-02 08:08 -0400 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <j18pcq$c4$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (2 earlier) <j18j47$6k7$1@speranza.aioe.org> <buo1ux4f6ob.fsf@dhlpc061.dev.necel.com> <j18jtm$8ie$1@speranza.aioe.org> <99q2kbFaa6U8@mid.individual.net> <j18maj$ea1$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
On 8/2/2011 7:16 AM, boltar2003@boltar.world wrote: > 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. Right, but letting throw accept multiple objects would present an inconsistency with the 'return', whereas now it's consistent and logical. Besides, what's the point of throwing multiple objects? Can there occur several exceptional situations at once? Seems that the most severe is always what you want to report [by throwing]. And, just like with returning from a function, you're free to wrap your multiple objects in a struct and throw that. V -- I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask
Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll 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