2013/4/30 Pierre Joye <[email protected]>:
> hi,
>
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 7:54 PM, Stas Malyshev <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> You may have a lib/object/chunk of code which raises exceptions, because
>>> its developer thought some error is not recoverable; but when you use
>>> it, you don't want to break your program's execution.
>>
>> That's why you have try/catch.
>
> Exactly, I cannot agree more here.
>
> This proposal brings yet again exceptions for control flow, which is
> really not what they are designed for (no matter the language, or
> almost all languages). An exception can be handled and the program can
> continue? Catch it, any other tricks bring control flow using
> exception and that's really a bad idea.
I'm quite opposed to changing try/catch flow with this additions for
the same reasons that Stas and Pierre mentioned.
Especially since this can perfectly be achieved without it and a few
more ifs/whiles/gotos.
There no need to have a gentle/nice-to-have syntax to handle the cases
of libraries abusing exceptions.
Cheers,
Patrick