[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Custom extensions to Lua
- From: Glenn Maynard <glenn@...>
- Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 18:29:48 -0400
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 04:27:05PM -0500, Rici Lake wrote:
> You could say the same thing about exceptions, really. Why should the
> compiler provide specific support when it could be achieved in the
> standard library (with setjmp and friends)?
Destructors need to be called, and setjmp() can't do that.
(setjmp is evil, but so are C++ exceptions, at least in practice: they
bloat binaries far more than their value, in my opinion. I tend to
stick to old-fashioned error returns.)
> >You can't forget anything if you use a template type that doesn't
> >from a pointer:
> > locked<int> value = 1;
> > value = 2;
> Yes, again. In which case, the use of the synchronized attribute would
> have been precisely equivalent, aside from the issue of whether it
> should be in the compiler, in a standard template library, or even
> implemented with a preprocessor.
Yep; I was responding to the suggestion that this approach is less safe
because you can "forget" things.