🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <47va08$8lb@gabi.gabi-soft.fr>,
   kanze@gabi-soft.fr (J. Kanze) wrote:
>As far as I can see, all of the exceptions thrown by the standard
>library derive from the class exception, so they form a tree, not a
>forest.
>
>This seems logical to me; the isA relationship definitly holds, and
>there is a fundamental relationship (as opposed to the case of an Object
>class, from which everything derives).  I would even suggest that unless
>there were very strong motives for doing otherwise, applications base
>their exception hierarchy on the one used by the standard library.

I notice this isn't covered in Cline's online FAQ, but it is covered in his 
book (highly recommended: "C++ FAQs", Addison-Wesley, 1995, ISBN 
0-201-58958-3).  See Section 21, "Tactical Advice for Exception Handling", 
where the very first entry (FAQ #261) launches right into this question.

BTW, I concur heartily with James' last remark.  At the moment I can't imagine 

a motive for doing otherwise, actually, that couldn't be solved by simply 
gathering your own exceptions under a root that's derived from 'xmsg' (or 
'exception'? is that the correct DWP name?) and ignoring the fact that you're 
in the tree when you want to ignore it.

Herb


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Herb Sutter                 2228 Urwin, Ste 102         voice (416) 618-0184
Connected Object Solutions  Oakville ON Canada L6L 2T2    fax (905) 847-6019
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  Submission address: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu.
  Contact address: std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  The moderation policy
  is summarized in http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt/std-c++/policy.html. ]