On Sunday, October 28, 2012 13:08:50 Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> What about allowing catch-statements without a try-statement, something
> like this:
>
> void foo ()
> {
> // some code ...
>
> catch (Exception e)
> {
>
> }
> }
>
> This would be the same as the whole function would be wrapped in a
> try-statement. It's a quite handy feature that's available in Ruby.So, you save one set of braces? I don't see how that really buys you much. - Jonathan M Davis
