Re: exceptions (was Re: First stage of Quesa changes now complete)

[Roger H. <rog...@mi...>]

On Thursday, January 27, 2005, at 04:06  pm, Joseph J. Strout wrote:

>
> I hope I'm not (again) chiming in late here, but I hope we're building 
> Quesa (or at least, making it possible to build quesa) with exception 
> support turned off.  In at least some compilers, having exceptions on 
> incurs a noticeable overhead even if you're not using them.

That is our aim, I certainly have not written any throw statements and 
I am checking the list's collected wisdom
on anything contentious.



> My experience also matches Dair's, i.e., that in C++ code, exceptions 
> tend to cause more grief than good.

My experience is that exceptions have avoided writing reams of tests of 
status returns and freed up the
function result for the purpose it was intended for, the result of the 
function, and that being able to use
the function result rather than passing back through a star parameter 
both makes code simpler to
understand, more elegant and avoids undefined variables because I 
almost never have to write a
declaration without an initialiser.

Wouldn't life be boring if we all the same!

Roger.