Timeline for How to deal with historic exception specifications in maintained C++ code
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 7, 2015 at 10:37 | comment | added | Wolf | @TommyA Why not add another answer? | |
| Jan 7, 2015 at 10:37 | comment | added | Wolf | I see, If you integrate the reference to your answer, I'll be happy to upvote it. | |
| Jan 6, 2015 at 19:14 | comment | added | Rob K | Not a personal feeling at all, it's the best practice advocated by the people who standardized the language and write the compilers. See gotw.ca/publications/mill22.htm So why keep them? They're just noise in the code, and in fact can be worse than noise if they cause misunderstandings as shown in the linked article. | |
| Jan 6, 2015 at 16:44 | comment | added | Tommy Andersen | Possibly move them to the function comment block. | |
| Jan 6, 2015 at 16:09 | comment | added | Wolf | Thanks for letting me know. Is this only a personal feeling (BTW: I feel the same) or based on lots of bad experiences, or team decision, etc.? | |
| Jan 6, 2015 at 16:04 | history | answered | Rob K | CC BY-SA 3.0 |