4 ms·

only the language runtime and operating system would be allowed to raise exceptions So you still need all the exception machinery, but "normal" code can't

• Jare 7y ago
  It's not really about who can use it, but rather what it is used for - language runtime can't use it for anything they want. So if a systems-level feature of the language is supported in part by runtime code, that's a place where this may happen, e.g. the Go Runtime throwing a stack overflow. Of course the counterpoint is that C++ and to some extent Java are designed for allowing user code to create system-level facilities, so we're back to the land of "please don't misuse exceptions."
• __s 7y ago
  This is how it's done in Rust. panic macro unwinds stack for tracebacks, there's std::panic::catch_unwind, but panic can be compiled to be aborts to do away with stack unwinding, error handling is meant to be done with Result<T, E> type, whereas panic is meant for unrecoverable errors
  • riwsky 7y ago
    This is not an apples-to-apples comparison. In Rust, app code can panic, even though it’s not idiomatic. That does not meet the standard prescribed by the quote from the article.
• notacoward 7y ago
  > who's in charge of deciding what's "language runtime" and what isn't? Maybe the people who define the language? Who implement and package its standard compilers/interpreters? This is not confusing outside the world of empty rhetoric.