return in loop for ?

[Mike Meyer]

Roy Smith <roy at panix.com> writes:
> In any case, in a language which has exceptions, it's almost impossible to 
> really have true SESE, since an exception could be thrown from almost 
> anywhere.  To be fair, there are those who use this to argue that 
> exceptions themselves are a bad thing.  In my last job, the official style 
> guide said to not use exceptions in C++ because they generate confusing 
> flow of control, but I think that's becomming the minority view these days.

I really like Eiffel's model of exception handling. Instead of having
the ability to catch exceptions at arbitrary points in your code -
which, as you point out - can lead to confusing flow of control - a
function can have an exception handler - a "retry" clause - that
handles all exceptions in that function. Further, the retry clause
does one of two things: it either starts the function over again, or
passes the exception back up the chain. I'm not sure that it stacks up
on the practicality scale, but it certainly leads to a more
comprehensible program when you are dealing with lots of exceptions.

        <mike
-- 
Mike Meyer <mwm at mired.org>			http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/
Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information.