Unifying Exception types in setup

[Robert Collins]

On Sun, 2003-03-16 at 21:53, Max Bowsher wrote:

> Makes sense. I'll wait for Robert to explain why setup has 2 different
> exception paradigms, and which one can be removed, and if we keep Exception,
> whether we can junk appErrNo, and replace it with derived classes as you
> suggest.

appErrNo is useful because it allows easy discrimination between the
exception that occured, without multiple catch blocks. I'm not wedded to
it by any means though.

Setup has the Exception class for it's own handleable exceptions. We use
runtime_error for instance, because it's the appropriate exception for a
runtime-error.

For the bulk of the exit() calling routines, I suspect runtime_error is
appropriate.

Rob
-- 
GPG key available at: <http://users.bigpond.net.au/robertc/keys.txt>.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin-apps/attachments/20030316/d912fee8/attachment.sig>