https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=400632
--- Comment #6 from Markus Elfring <markus.elfr...@web.de> --- (In reply to Christoph Cullmann from comment #5) > As we don't use them nor do we use any libraries that emit any exceptions Do you use the C++ standard library occasionally? > that we want to catch, it is totally valid to not care for them. I suggest to reconsider such a view once more. Would you like to be prepared for “std::bad_alloc” (as a well-known example)? > 0% of the code in KTextEditor is prepared to be interrupted by exceptions, I find this information questionable. Interruptions can occur. I guess that it can become more important if reasonable program behaviour is provided also in exceptional software situations. > I see value in making code easier to maintain for things we need to take care > of, e.g. resource management via smart pointers, doing locking via mutex > lockers and not manual lock/unlock, .... Does this feedback qualify to reopen the bug report? > If that change doesn't lead to some include nightmare, Are you concerned for such software build dependencies? > I would go for in-place members, yes. I am curious if the reduction of dynamic memory allocation can evolve further. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
