On 19-02-2012 15:46, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 2/19/12 8:44 AM, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
On 19-02-2012 15:41, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
That helps. This quite nicely illustrates that types don't necessarily
need to proliferate. Something not much more constraining can be done
today:
try {
...
} catch(IOException e)
{
if (e.errno !in subsetYouWantToHandle) throw e;
...
}
Andrei
As I pointed out on the pull request, this is *evil*. It resets the
stack trace.
I understand, that's a good point. Could the matter be considered an
implementation issue?
Andrei
Unfortunately, I don't think so. As far as I am aware, there is no good
way to solve the problem; you can't know whether the user intended to
rethrow (and thus continue the stack trace) as opposed to doing a clean
throw.
You could say that if the throw statement is "throw new T();", then a
new stack trace is created, and in all other cases, the stack trace is
continued, however, this doesn't work universally (think: creating and
returning an exception object in a function and then throwing it).
--
- Alex
