Re: Unhandled exception - How to turn off!


"Ulrich Eckhardt" <eckhardt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:3357d4-dmp.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Ben Voigt wrote:
You want new to return NULL in case of failure instead of throwing?
You're now (since C++03 I think) supposed to do:

new (std::nothrow) T[N];

to get that functionality.

FYI: You have been supposed to do that since the C++ standard was created.

Other than that, not using exception handling is IHMO stupid, you are
throwing out one of the most interesting features of C++ along with its
whole standardlibrary (which relies on exceptions).

Well, as I see it, it's linking with the standard library that should get
you the throwing behavior. Using the C runtime only, ought to get you a
version of new that doesn't throw objects in the standard C++ library. It's
against the spirit of C and C++, which is providing a very extensible
language, and functionality through libraries, not language, to have a
language keyword (new) force the user to include a particular library
(std::*). Luckily, that's only the default implementation of new, and
std::bad_alloc doesn't actually have a privileged place -- you can easily
redefine new to use your own exception type, or none at all -- and this is
important -- using the same mechanism by which the default new is provided.

I despise architectures like, Java, where they claim a small language with
few keywords, extensible by libraries, but half the standard library
receives special handling from the compiler (Object, String,
OutOfMemoryException, just to name a few) that you can never achieve for
your own code.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: read and write
    ... the C standard says otherwise. ... which are also not a part of the language. ... of these libraries are part of "C", whatever it is, since they contain ... However, any hosted implementation is required to include the entire standard C library, and prior to the standard the first edition of K&R says "Chapter 7 describes the standard C I/O library, which provides a common interface to the operating system. ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: read and write
    ... the C standard says otherwise. ... which are also not a part of the language. ... of these libraries are part of "C", whatever it is, since they contain ... common interface to the operating system. ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: [LONG] Re: Why code completion and early error checking are needed
    ... >> the programmer who wants such features. ... > libraries to find the type declaration. ... If you type std::vector that means the one from the Standard. ... > of the language to have certain naming and declaration standards ...
    (comp.lang.cpp)
  • Re: Qi Seems Great
    ... Common Lisp will simply trounce anything else in the long ... but having third party libraries to support the new ... ideas come along doesn't mean that the language itself will grow. ... Having in mind that the CL standard is rather old, ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Forth and Unix -- history
    ... but modern Forths mostly drive them away. ... You have no justification to call STOIC retro nostalgia given that Standard Forth is pretty much stuck in the mid 70's. ... Users provide a large fraction of those libraries for C. Publicly. ... users must find the language comfortable in order to create such things. ...
    (comp.lang.forth)