This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Ziemowit Laski wrote:
On Wednesday, Sep 24, 2003, at 16:55 US/Pacific, Nicolas Roard wrote:
What I don't understand, is that we _already_ have an exception system,
so what was those requests about ?
If NS_DURING/NS_HANDLER names scared programmers, well, we could
define them as @try ... @catch :-)
But I don't see what's so interesting with the new exception system,
apart
to bring some incompatibilities ...
Someone could explain it to me ?
See previous e-mails from Stan and myself. :-)
Which reminds me, I did forget to mention yet 2 more benefits: - The exception system will automatically mark variables volatile as needed, so that they do not get clobbered by the _setjmp/_longjmp interaction. - If an exception is not handled by any of your @catch clauses, it is automatically propagated up the call chain
All in all, it makes exceptions in ObjC much more accessible to those coming from C++ or Java.
Well, as I understand it there is one more benefit:
- it doesn't require an OPENSTEP implementation
But as a user I actually would prefer something like
http://users.pandora.be/stes/block98/index.html
Now THAT's something many users request for objc (just search the gcc- and GNUstep-mailing lists). I can happily live without @catch and @throw, but "objc blocks" is something I really like to see in gcc (in a platform independent implementation).
--Zem -------------------------------------------------------------- Ziemowit Laski 1 Infinite Loop, MS 301-2K Mac OS X Compiler Group Cupertino, CA USA 95014-2083 Apple Computer, Inc. +1.408.974.6229 Fax .5477
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |