[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[lmi] [PATCH] Add undisplayable_exception

From: Vadim Zeitlin
Subject: [lmi] [PATCH] Add undisplayable_exception
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 20:08:43 +0200

 Hello again,

 This is the last patch on which the testing changes depend. I expect it
might be a bit more controversial than the previous ones as it's not really
clear why should there be a special case for this "undisplayable_exception".
And, indeed, during the normal program execution this isn't needed. However
the GUI tests suite depends on being able to catch the exceptions thrown
when a test fails and this wouldn't work if the normal GUI code caught
these exceptions and displayed them to the user and adding a special class
for the sole purpose of allowing to handle it specifically inside
report_exception() is the simplest possibility to do it that I see.

 The patch itself should explain show more clearly how it works:

-- >8 --
diff --git a/handle_exceptions.hpp b/handle_exceptions.hpp
index 2fa9e4b..0205281 100644
--- a/handle_exceptions.hpp
+++ b/handle_exceptions.hpp
@@ -30,6 +30,21 @@

 #include <cstdlib>   // std::exit()
 #include <exception>
+#include <stdexcept>
+/// Base class for the exceptions which should not be reported to the user.
+/// Implicitly-declared special member functions do the right thing.
+class undisplayable_exception
+    :public std::runtime_error
+  public:
+    explicit undisplayable_exception(std::string const& what)
+        :std::runtime_error(what)
+        {
+        }

 /// This function, of type std::terminate_handler, is intended to be
 /// used as the argument of std::set_terminate().
@@ -67,6 +82,11 @@ inline void lmi_terminate_handler()
 ///  - the safe default action (throwing this exception) was accepted,
 /// in which case it's pointless to repeat the same message.
+/// Don't handle undisplayable_exception which is the base class for the
+/// exceptions which are not supposed to be ever shown to the user during the
+/// normal program execution -- nor even to arise in this case -- but which may
+/// be generated in special circumstances, e.g. in the testing build.
 /// See
 //   http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.mingw.user/18355
 //     [2005-12-16T09:20:33Z from Greg Chicares]
@@ -85,6 +105,10 @@ inline void report_exception()
     catch(hobsons_choice_exception const&)
+    catch(undisplayable_exception const&)
+        {
+        throw;
+        }
     catch(std::exception const& e)
-- >8 --

 Possible improvement could consist in choosing an appropriately eldritch
name instead of the current banally descriptive "undisplayable_exception",
but my knowledge of Lovecraftian lore is insufficient to know what would be
most appropriate for a unit testing related class (and has Lovecraft really
plumbed such depths of horror to touch unit testing?).

 Please let me know what do you think about this patch, TIA!

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]