▲ 37 ▼ I Don't Use Exceptions in C++ Anymore (thelig.ht) submitted 2 years ago by pnutzh4x0r@lemmy.ndlug.org to c/programming@programming.dev 18 comments fedilink hide all child comments Using exceptions in C++ desktop and server applications overall made sense to me. As I expanded my usage of C++ into other domains, specifically embedded domains, I began to experience more compelling reasons not to use exceptions first-hand... From lobste.rs
[–] lysdexic@programming.dev 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) Unless I’m misreading, you brought monads into it. You're misreading it. What do you think a 'Result' type is? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BatmanAoD@programming.dev 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Well, in Rust, it's a sum-type, with functions that also let you use it like a monad instead of using explicit pattern matching. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] lysdexic@programming.dev 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) Well, in Rust, it’s a sum-type The discussion is on to use monads in C++, and not on why is C++ different than Rust. I repeat: you do not need sum types to implement a Result monad in C++. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BatmanAoD@programming.dev 1 point 2 years ago The discussion was about sum types. The top-level comment, the one to which you originally responded, says: It's a shame that sum type support is still so lacking in C++. Proper Result types (ala Haskell or Rust) are generally much nicer to deal with, especially in embedded contexts. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] BatmanAoD@programming.dev 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Well, in Rust, it's a sum-type, with functions that also let you use it like a monad instead of using explicit pattern matching. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] lysdexic@programming.dev 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) Well, in Rust, it’s a sum-type The discussion is on to use monads in C++, and not on why is C++ different than Rust. I repeat: you do not need sum types to implement a Result monad in C++. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BatmanAoD@programming.dev 1 point 2 years ago The discussion was about sum types. The top-level comment, the one to which you originally responded, says: It's a shame that sum type support is still so lacking in C++. Proper Result types (ala Haskell or Rust) are generally much nicer to deal with, especially in embedded contexts. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] lysdexic@programming.dev 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) Well, in Rust, it’s a sum-type The discussion is on to use monads in C++, and not on why is C++ different than Rust. I repeat: you do not need sum types to implement a Result monad in C++. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BatmanAoD@programming.dev 1 point 2 years ago The discussion was about sum types. The top-level comment, the one to which you originally responded, says: It's a shame that sum type support is still so lacking in C++. Proper Result types (ala Haskell or Rust) are generally much nicer to deal with, especially in embedded contexts. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] BatmanAoD@programming.dev 1 point 2 years ago The discussion was about sum types. The top-level comment, the one to which you originally responded, says: It's a shame that sum type support is still so lacking in C++. Proper Result types (ala Haskell or Rust) are generally much nicer to deal with, especially in embedded contexts. permalink fedilink source parent