David Rush <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
| Please note: I am talking about a matter of degree here. My biggest
| beef with exception-based systems is that they end up getting used far
| too generally (for unusual code paths rather than actual failure
At least as I read it, Kent Pitman's 1990 survey paper on exceptions
suggests that there's nothing wrong with using exceptions for "unusual
It is important to recognize that this distinction between normal
and exceptional situations is in some sense contrived. Making this
distinction does not change the way programs behave; it simply
changes the way we reason about programs--hopefully for the better.
In some cases, there may be efficiency reasons for considering
some cases to be exceptional.
In particular, allowing some [presumably infrequent] non-error code
paths to be considered "exceptional" [and using inconspicuous flow
control primitives to access them, such as CATCH/THROW] can, in turn,
allow the "normal" code paths to be considerably simplified without
compromising program correctness.
Rob Warnock, 30-3-510 <email@example.com>
SGI Network Engineering <http://www.meer.net/~rpw3/>
1600 Amphitheatre Pkwy. Phone: 650-933-1673
Mountain View, CA 94043 PP-ASEL-IA
[Note: firstname.lastname@example.org and email@example.com aren't for humans ]