Hi Andi,
> I've stated my opinion in the past (search the archives) and I don't =
think=20
> it'd be feasible (nor critical) to implement this...
Do you agree that if we don't have finally we should have a way to catch =
all exceptions ?

Let me explain:
If you have a library that can raise a huge number of different =
exceptions and you don't have finally, you should treat all exceptions =
at the same try/catch block, and rethrow the exceptions that should =
propagate.
If you have finally, you can treat just the exceptions you need and =
leave the others to be treated by the caller.

For example: if you don't have finally, don't have a "catch-all" clause =
and lock some resouce inside a try block, you need to unlock it:
1) in the try block: before every return statement after the =
resource allocation
2) write a catch block for all possible exceptions that could be =
raised and put the code before every return/throw statement (this could =
be dozens of times)
3) at the end of the try/catch block

If you have finally, you just put the same code inside the finally =
block. No need to catch every exceptions one-by-one, no need to rethrow =
exceptions that shouldn't be caught, no need to make code redundancy...

I know it's not critical, but IMHO it's important. I hope I was clear =
enough... :-)

Cristiano Duarte

--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: [url]http://www.php.net/unsub.php[/url]