Exception handling: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 22:24, 5 December 2022

Revision as of 03:58, 9 December 2022

Line 117:

He backed this statement with experience from several operating systems. The key example was Cedar/Mesa: It was written by people who liked and used resumption, but after ten years of use, there was only one use of resumption left in the half million line system – and that was a context inquiry. Because resumption wasn't actually necessary for such a context inquiry, they removed it and found a significant speed increase in that part of the system. In each and every case where resumption had been used it had – over the ten years – become a problem and a more appropriate design had replaced it. Basically, every use of resumption had represented a failure to keep separate levels of abstraction disjoint.{{sfn|Stroustrup|1994|p=392}}}}

Exception-handling languages with resumption include [[Common Lisp]] with its [[Exception handling#Condition systems|Condition System]], PL/I, Dylan, [[R_(programming_language)|R]],<ref>{{Cite web |title=R: Condition Handling and Recovery |url=https://search.r-project.org/R/refmans/base/html/conditions.html |access-date=2022-12-05 |website=search.r-project.org}}</ref>, and [[Smalltalk]]. However, the majority of newer programming languages follow C++ and use termination semantics.

=== Exception handling implementation ===