![]() ![]() Libraries from big names including Novell and Oracle throw The benefit: you can see what aįunction throws and protect yourself without all the babysitting.Ī lack of exception handling is big problem in. People don't think about this, but the exceptions thrown by a moduleĪre part of that module's interface. Here is the program: if me = idiot: exit(). Mindview .net code#One day, I went through about 10,000 lines of code and moved argumentĬhecking code outside of try blocks because I realized I was handling That may become available later without code changes. Checked exceptions occurīecause of downed databases, missing files, network problems - things They occurīecause of bad code and insufficient testing. ![]() In general, unchecked exceptions shouldn't be caught. Throwing generic Exception or inheriting all custom exception typesįrom RuntimeException. Programmers finding ways around the annoyance. I think all of the examples you listed referred specifically to most > See also: > and note especially the comment from the coder who says that he simply > declares his functions to throw Exception (the most generic checked > exception), thus defeating the whole point of checked exceptions. It's main appeal, it seems to me, is to give a > false sense of security to Java developers who fail to realise that under > certain circumstances Java will raise certain checked exceptions *even if > they are not declared*. > Even if that is not true, checked exceptions are a feature that *in > practice* seems to lead to poor exception handling and cruft needed only > to satisfy the compiler: >. > Note also that Bruce Eckel repeats a rumour that checked exceptions were > *literally* an experiment snuck into the Java language while James > Gosling was away on holiday. What indications have there been that this has > been a flaw? I can see it alienating a large group of up- and-coming > developers. Perhaps something to provide or just shut off via a > command line parameter. At the same time, with my limited experience with Java, it has been > a massive annoyance. Languages that don't support > exceptions as part of their signature lead to capturing generic > Exception all throughout code. > On Mon, 13:29:06 -0800, Travis Parks wrote: > Exception handling is one of those subjects few understand and fewer can > implement properly in modern code. ![]() Premature Optimization is the root of all evil.On Nov 28, 5:57 pm, Steven D'Aprano wrote: (Although smart pointers sort of solve that) If you have a vector of classes that contain data that is a whole set of copy constructors and destructors that are called.It isn't as bad if you are using pointers, but pointers bring in a whole load of new fun. The vector is also not great for hiding cost, if you run over the allocated space, a larger amount of memory has to be allocated, the data copied across and the old data destroyed. Would have allocate at least 8 bytes on the heap(There should be a decent memory allocator in your stl implantation, so it isn't quite as bad as doing maloc(8) or new char). Not to say it costless, or even cheap.Īlso, with C++, you get a lot of hidden calls to new How do you mean? new in C# doesn't map exactly to malloc, I am fairly sure it is faster. I add commented out delete lines just for my piece of mind. The one thing about C# that really pisses me off is you can toss variables around and make them without thinking, which leads to using too much memory. I add commented out delete lines just for my piece of mind.Įdit: Is this not fitting for my 666th post? If you don't mind going M$, you can learn a little bit there (most of which will be useless later). If you want to really start simple, well. I don't know a lot about D (enough to know I refuse to know more), but it's like a simpler, more confusing C. If you can learn fast, that should work for you. Introduces you to more C-style code, but without having to handle memory or anything. It gives you an understanding of functions, variables, types and logic/flow control. I like C::B for some of it's features (and the fact a number of things, like CnE, compile there and not VC), but then it doesn't work so well.įor a beginning language though, I'd suggest some variant of BASIC. It's unfortunate VC is a nicer IDE than Code::Blocks. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |