home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: news.compuserve.com!newsmaster
- From: 100754.2730@compuserve.com (Martin Aupperle)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
- Subject: Re: Exception and what to put into them
- Date: Thu, 04 Jan 1996 09:40:23 GMT
- Organization: CompuServe Incorporated
- Message-ID: <4cg7kr$9iq@dub-news-svc-6.compuserve.com>
- References: <49i7hh$aco@news1.mclink.it> <4an868$def@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: dd02-008.compuserve.com
- X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.56
-
- dstkelley@aol.com (Dstkelley) wrote:
-
- >It is my humble opinion that logging the line number of where the
- >exception occured is short sided thinking. I come from a large
- >development environment where many people work on the same code. As soon
- >as other programmers begin modifiying that code, that line number in the
- >log file will probably become incorrect due to people adding or deleting
- >lines of code in the file and not updating the log message. I feel that
- >informational messages, along with maybe the class or method name, is more
- >useful.
-
- Before you release a version to testing, you should freeze it (i.e.
- nobody is allowed to make any changes any more). Any changes
- (including bug fixes) should be made to the NEXT VERSION ONLY! Then
- file name/line number info is very helpful to quickly find the source
- of an exception/assertion(precondition/postcondition... IN THE VERSION
- UNDER TEST.
-
- Using class names/function names instead is much more effort since the
- necessary strings cannot be generated automatically. And, btw,
- sometimes class/function names change between versions, too...
-
-
-
- -----------------------------------
- Signatures are a waste of bandwidth
- -----------------------------------
-
-