Received: by 10.66.79.36 with SMTP id g4mr3634331pax.38.1350335627584;
        Mon, 15 Oct 2012 14:13:47 -0700 (PDT)
Path: s9ni10696pbb.0!nntp.google.com!news.glorb.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx04.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "LudovicoVan" <ju...@diegidio.name>
Newsgroups: comp.programming
Subject: Re: etiology of exceptions
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 22:13:41 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <k5huaa$iq7$1@dont-email.me>
References: <d4aa81c8-9fb6-4251-a065-e3573eccce62@googlegroups.com> <902b53ef-fa30-4470-914f-a5d3bf904b60@googlegroups.com> <02c3ed18-a81a-4ae0-b03d-666bc239d862@k6g2000vbr.googlegroups.com> <k54b09$v0v$1@dont-email.me> <0eed1afd-7a29-4b46-b990-0ee9d988c76d@ib4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> <k56i7p$4fq$1@dont-email.me> <72efd5d6-d0d0-4412-882d-c5e33cea45dd@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Injection-Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 21:13:47 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org; posting-host="2f71c38840d22add344a381d73efef73";
	logging-data="19271"; mail-complaints-to="ab...@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX190iPxUj6/kX2oyqwey4/bY0igV3DZ7L3w="
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8089.726
In-Reply-To: <72efd5d6-d0d0-4412-882d-c5e33cea45dd@googlegroups.com>
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8089.726
Importance: Normal
Cancel-Lock: sha1:bmkhSy3z+m8Kp3InTfFLP6nDtlQ=
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<jussi.san...@ard.fi> wrote in message 
news:72efd5d6-d0d0-4412-882d-c5e33cea45dd@googlegroups.com...
> torstai, 11. lokakuuta 2012 16.40.10 UTC+3 Julio P. Di Egidio kirjoitti:
>> "Nick Keighley" <nick_keighley_nos...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
<snip>

>> > the difficulty is that exception specifications are broken in C++
>>
>> You are using "specification" in a very specific technical sense, but I 
>> was
>> referring to the formal documentation that must go with any product,
>> regardless of implementation details.  And the overall point was that an
>> exception is, *by definition*, something we *do* forecast.
>>
> When we talk about C++ and other common languages, the specifications are 
> in the form of function prototypes.

Thanks for explaining what was already understood.  OTOH, what you talk 
about remains quite irrelevant to the OP.

-LV