Ugh. Wrote that e-mail at too late an hour last night. Bad typeohs/grammar even for me. I'll try to clarify any for anyone who's still reading this thread:
Christopher Smith wrote: >>Exceptions in destructors are evil. > > I'll give you that, particularly with sockets. Honestly the mistake was > probably using that socket class. Should be: "Honestly the mistake was probably the decision to use that particular socket class." >>I maintain that it is the same. However, this is just devolving into: >>"Is not! Is too!" I'm not going to convince you; I'll have to let >>painful experience do that for me. ;) > > Your statement that it is the same make any sense to me. Should be: "Your statement that it is the same doesn't make any sense to me." > Oh it's much worse than that. Based on your premise, despite all > evidence to the contrary, if you didn't disable exceptions in your C++ > runtime, you have to write tons more code to avoid memory leaks in your > application. Should be: "...you would have to write tons more code to avoid resources leaks in your application." --Chris -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
