Re: [Vala] How to ignore exceptions?
- From: rastersoft <raster rastersoft com>
- To: Fabian Deutsch <fabian deutsch gmx de>
- Cc: vala-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: [Vala] How to ignore exceptions?
- Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2011 01:20:41 +0100
Yes, I like it!
El 01/11/11 00:46, Fabian Deutsch escribió:
Maybe
nocatch { ... }
would make that case even clearer.
Am Dienstag, den 01.11.2011, 00:43 +0100 schrieb rastersoft:
I don't think that
try { ... }
is a good idea, but
try { ... };
is. Just removing the catch can result in involuntary errors, but if you
have to choose between a ";" or a "catch", the probability of
"forgetting" it is greatly reduced.
El 31/10/11 23:22, pancake escribió:
Hi
On 31/10/2011, at 20:16, Aleksander Wabik<alex wabik gmail com> wrote:
My 2 pennies:
What about adding a code attribute like [IgnoreException] ? that would perform better than trycatching
It seems the most logical option to me. Vala is a language that allows
ignoring exceptions, and (as far as I remember, it was a while ago when
I was writing my vala code) it generates code printing warning about
uncaught exception each time the exception is thrown, but not caught. I
guess that we should have two solutions (not one or the other, but both
implemented):
- command line switch like -Wno-exceptions - it would disable all
warnings about uncaught exceptions at the compile time, and in the
non-debug builds it would also cause not generating code for printing
exception information if the exception is thrown;
Looks an ugly solution to me. Some of those exceptions are important :)
- and some code attribute, that could be used in code, if the author is
100% sure that in this particular case exception will never be
thrown, or that it can be ignored (compile and run time behaviour the
same as above).
The option of allowing syntax like
Try { ... }
Without catch looks good to me, and probably cleaner than adding a code attribute.
But i dont know of any lang that does this already.. So maybe its inconsistent
Both these features have the advantage that no syntax changes in the
language are needed.
best regards,
On 31/10/2011, at 10:06, Xavier Bestel<xavier bestel free fr> wrote:
On Sun, 2011-10-30 at 11:04 -0400, Sam Wilson wrote:
Perhaps a better way to do this is like this:
string[] test = new string[3];
for (int i = 0; i< 3; i++)
{
try
{
test[i] = kf.get_string(group, key);
}
catch (KeyFile.Error error)
{
// Do nothing
}
}
if (!test[0]&& !test[1]&& !test[3]) return false;
What do you think?
Won't that interrupt the execution flow, i.e. if the first
g_key_file_get_string() throws an exception, the other ones won't be
executed ?
Xav
_______________________________________________
vala-list mailing list
vala-list gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/vala-list
_______________________________________________
vala-list mailing list
vala-list gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/vala-list
--
Mój klucz publiczny o identyfikatorze 1024D/E12C5A4C znajduje się na
serwerze hkp://keys.gnupg.net
My public key with signature 1024D/E12C5A4C is on the server
hkp://keys.gnupg.net
_______________________________________________
vala-list mailing list
vala-list gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/vala-list
--
Nos leemos
RASTER (Linux user #228804)
raster rastersoft com http://www.rastersoft.com
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]