Browse thread
Today's inflamatory opinion: exceptions are bad
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: | 2006-12-10 (06:29) |
From: | malc <av1474@c...> |
Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Today's inflamatory opinion: exceptions are bad |
On Sat, 9 Dec 2006, Brian Hurt wrote: > > I think I've come to the conclusion that exceptions are bad. > > In Ocaml, they're useless in many cases, and in most cases wrong. Avoiding > them generally makes for better code. There are two vague types of > exceptions- those the program can, and probably should- handle, and those > that the program can't, and probably should even try to, handle. > > For the former, returning a variant type ('a option if nothing else) is a > better idea, for (at least) two reasons. One, the type system enforces the > requirement to actually handle the error, at the location the return value of > the function is desired. Want the result? Handle the errors. Which allow a > function to "pass along" an error if it wants to. So you could still write > functions like: [..snip..] Guess there's third type, code might detect catastrophic failure during the run of custom block finalizer, in which case, should there be a need for a cleanup actions, raising an exception might be the only choice, however i couldn't say offhand whether OCaml allows to raise exceptions in this context at all. -- vale