| 1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132333435363738394041424344454647484950515253545556575859606162636465666768697071727374757677787980818283848586878889909192 |
- <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
- <meta name="generator" content="HTML Tidy, see www.w3.org">
- <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
- <title>Error and Exception Handling</title>
- <h1>Error and Exception Handling</h1>
- <h2>References</h2>
- <p>The following paper is a good introduction to some of the issues of
- writing robust generic components:
- <blockquote>
- <a href="generic_exception_safety.html">D. Abrahams: ``Exception Safety
- in Generic Components''</a>, originally published in <a href=
- "http://www.springer.de/cgi-bin/search_book.pl?isbn=3-540-41090-2">M.
- Jazayeri, R. Loos, D. Musser (eds.): Generic Programming, Proc. of a
- Dagstuhl Seminar, Lecture Notes on Computer Science 1766</a>
- </blockquote>
- <h2>Guidelines</h2>
- <h3>When should I use exceptions?</h3>
- <p>The simple answer is: ``whenever the semantic and performance
- characteristics of exceptions are appropriate.''
- <p>An oft-cited guideline is to ask yourself the question ``is this an
- exceptional (or unexpected) situation?'' This guideline has an attractive
- ring to it, but is usually a mistake. The problem is that one person's
- ``exceptional'' is another's ``expected'': when you really look at the
- terms carefully, the distinction evaporates and you're left with no
- guideline. After all, if you check for an error condition, then in some
- sense you expect it to happen, or the check is wasted code.
- <p>A more appropriate question to ask is: ``do we want stack unwinding
- here?'' Because actually handling an exception is likely to be
- significantly slower than executing mainline code, you should also ask:
- ``Can I afford stack unwinding here?'' For example, a desktop application
- performing a long computation might periodically check to see whether the
- user had pressed a cancel button. Throwing an exception could allow the
- operation to be cancelled gracefully. On the other hand, it would probably
- be inappropriate to throw and <i>handle</i> exceptions in the inner loop of
- this computation because that would have a significant performance impact.
- <h3>What About Programmer Errors?</h3>
- <p>As a developer, if I have violated a precondition of a library I'm
- using, I don't want stack unwinding. What I want is a core dump or the
- equivalent - a way to inspect the state of the program at the exact point
- where the problem was detected. That usually means <tt>assert()</tt> or
- something like it.
- <p>Sometimes it is neccessary to have resilient APIs which can stand up to
- nearly any kind of client abuse, but there is usually a significant cost to
- this approach. For example, it usually requires that each object used by a
- client be tracked so that it can be checked for validity. If you need that
- sort of protection, it can usually be provided as a layer on top of a
- simpler API. Beware half-measures, though. An API which promises resilience
- against some, but not all abuse is an invitation to disaster. Clients will
- begin to rely on the protection and their expectations will grow to cover
- unprotected parts of the interface.
- <p><b>Note for Windows developers</b>: unfortunately, the native
- exception-handling used by most Windows compilers actually throws an
- exception when you use <tt>assert()</tt>. Actually, this is true of other
- programmer errors such as segmentation faults and divide-by-zero errors.
- One problem with this is that if you use JIT (Just In Time) debugging,
- there will be collateral exception-unwinding before the debugger comes up.
- Fortunately, there is a simple but little-known workaround, which is to use
- the following incantation:
- <blockquote>
- <pre>
- extern "C" void straight_to_debugger(unsigned int, EXCEPTION_POINTERS*)
- {
- throw;
- }
- extern "C" void (*old_translator)(unsigned, EXCEPTION_POINTERS*)
- = _set_se_translator(straight_to_debugger);
- </pre>
- </blockquote>
- <hr>
- <p>© Copyright David Abrahams 2001. Permission to copy, use, modify,
- sell and distribute this document is granted provided this copyright notice
- appears in all copies. This document is provided "as is" without express or
- implied warranty, and with no claim as to its suitability for any purpose.
- <p>Revised
- <!--webbot bot="Timestamp" s-type="EDITED" s-format="%d %B, %Y" startspan -->17 March, 2001<!--webbot bot="Timestamp" endspan i-checksum="40399" -->
|