On 24/08/18 05:33, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Yeah. I've used RAII plenty in D without problems, but the fact remains that
certain uses of it are very broken right now thanks to the constructor
issue. I suspect that Shachar's as negative about this as he is in part
because having RAII go wrong with the kind of low-level stuff Weka does
would be a serious problem
Yes.
I will point out that I was never bit by this bug either. We found it
while trying to figure out whether we want to start relying on
destructors internally.
The thing is, when a destructor doesn't run, this costs you a *lot* of
time in finding out why. We actually have stuff that is downright weird
as a result of not trusting destructors.
That stuff is so weird, that for Mecca I essentially said I'm going to
rely on them. Sadly, this means that this bug has become a bigger
blocker than it was.
(Having throwing destructors is even worse, it's just madness. Although it
is allowed in C++, it doesn't actually work.)
Yeah. We probably should have required that destructors be nothrow and force
destructor failures to be treated as Errors.
I'm sorry, but I'm not following your logic.
If you're willing to have an error raised by a destructor abort the
whole program, isn't the C++ solution preferable (abort the program only
on double errors, which hardly ever happens)?
Shachar
