13 Nov
2006
13 Nov
'06
8:09 p.m.
David Abrahams wrote:
"Peter Dimov" <pdimov@mmltd.net> writes:
Moving the catch clause to a destructor doesn't seem an improvement to me.
Using a catch clause to add information to a propagating exception feels syntactically heavy to me, but of course others may disagree. And it may also be that without language support, there's not really a good way to avoid that weight. I'm just expressing an aesthetic preference here.
Won't you need to prepare all the extra information even if nothing throws?