Roland Schwarz schrieb:
Please correct me if I am on the wrong track.
After having read: http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1274707&group_id=7586&atid=357586 And the summary there:
In summary, I believe the current behavior is: 1. Dangerous - hides program errors in a most un-exception-like manner.
I don't think so. Please explain why errors could be hidden.
2. Unfriendly - defeats useful debugging functionality, on some platforms.
I understand this, and agree.
3. Surprising - users don't expect libraries to inhibit propagation of their exceptions.
I can see this only in the light of 2) since the only target where the exception could be propagated to, is the debugger.
4. Unnecessary - the user can easily supply this behavior,
Agreed. The enabling of debuggers to catch uncaught exceptions is worth the removal of the catch all. I second that. (Altough I suspect this is platform dependant.) Since the catch all only is effective on windows and only guards against memory leakage in a case where the program is in questionable state anyways (uncaught exception), I would restate my recommendation to remove the catch clause entirely. I think the debuuger argument is much stronger than the safe-guarding against memory leakage in this case. Regards, Roland