On Thursday, March 23, 2017 23:26:38 rikki cattermole via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On 23/03/2017 11:20 PM, Георгий wrote: > > On Thursday, 23 March 2017 at 09:48:54 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > >> On Thursday, March 23, 2017 09:31:23 Георгий via Digitalmars-d wrote: > >> > >> If a function exists but has no implementation yet, it should use > >> assert(0). > > > > I didn't know that. > > That will throw an AssertError. You should try not to catch Error's. > So there still needs to be an exception of some kind.
My point was that it's bad design to be throwing an exception because something isn't implemented. If something isn't implemented, it's a bug. assert(0) is a great way to indicate that something isn't implemented yet and have the program die (like it should) if that function inadvertently gets called. I know that there are cases in Java land where folks (even the standard library in some cases) have a class implement an interface but not truly implement all of it and have the functions that aren't properly implemented throw an exception. But I don't see how that can be anything but bad design, and I don't think that we should be promoting such behavior in D's standard library. - Jonathan M Davis
