home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: in2.uu.net!panix!dturner
- From: dturner@panix.com (Doug Turner)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
- Subject: Re: Exceptions vs. assertions
- Date: Fri, 05 Jan 96 04:22:02 GMT
- Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC
- Message-ID: <4ci8v6$99n@news1.panix.com>
- References: <4cbfac$kst@dawn.mmm.com> <DKMJsE.LH5@falcon.daytonoh.attgis.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: dturner.dialup.access.net
- X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3
-
- In article <DKMJsE.LH5@falcon.daytonoh.attgis.com>,
- Dick Menninger <Dick.Menninger@DaytonOH.ATTGIS.COM> wrote:
- >
- >> ==========Kevin J Hopps, 1/2/96==========
- >
- >> Chris Page (page@tiac.net) wrote:
- >> > lalit@gramercy.ios.com (lalit gidwani) wrote:
- >
- >[stuff deleted]
- >
- >> > is this: If I expect a condition to occur during normal operation of
- >> > my program, then I do not use exceptions for it. I use exceptions,
- >> > only for exceptionally conditions, which I do not expect to
- >occur, but
- >> > I have to anticipate.
- >>
- >> This is a good approach. The issue of whether to throw exceptions or
- >> return status values is best decided by how likely the failure is than
- >> by how catastrophic it is. (Besides, the caller of a function knows
- >> better than the function itself how costly the failure is.)
- >
- >Exceptions are a control paradigm. Would you choose any
- [deletia]
- Says who? I say "exceptions are an error handling paradigm...".
-
- >Good Day
- >Dick
- >Dick.Menninger@DaytonOH.ATTGIS.COM
- >
-
-