Completion of error handling

[Markus Elfring]

Pino Toscano schrieb:
> Bug #157220 contains some information (for you) that you probably missed.
> Ie, please go with simple solution, instead of starting with overdesigned 
> checks (and yes, using aspect programming to just check a return value of one 
> library function _is_ an huge overdesign).

I did not miss it. I would like to stress my suggestion from comment #7.
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=157220#c7

I propose to write pointcuts for all functions that can return values.
Some corresponding error codes are checked already. But there a places
in the source files with open issues for complete software robustness.

I would like to achieve consensus on proper reactions for error handling
so that the maintenance of resulting advices can be performed in a few
central places and then automatically applied by dedicated tools. Are
you interested in an advice library?

Usual design choices are described in the article "Exception Handling
Alternatives" by Detlef Vollmann.
http://accu.org/index.php/journals/546

You informed me that exceptions (from the C++ programming language) are
generally not used in the K desktop environment.
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=157222#c3

I wonder if a (C++) class library should stick to traditional (C) error
codes forever. I hope that language feature (source code size, ...)
constraints can be adjusted so that the needed support will get better.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embedded_C%2B%2B

Regards,
Markus
 
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<