Re: Why leave the error handling to the caller?
- From: Mark McIntyre <markmcintyre@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 18:51:17 +0100
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 12:25:05 -0400, in comp.lang.c , CBFalconer
<cbfalconer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Richard Harter wrote:
Richard Heathfield <rjh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
If you deliberately release shoddy products, your company has
no long-term future anyway.
And your evidence for this is?
Microsoft - ta-da :-)
Cue Man-falling-off-skyscraper joke... ok so far...
--
Mark McIntyre
"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it."
--Brian Kernighan
.
- References:
- Re: Why leave the error handling to the caller?
- From: Richard Heathfield
- Re: Why leave the error handling to the caller?
- From: Malcolm McLean
- Re: Why leave the error handling to the caller?
- From: Eric Sosman
- Re: Why leave the error handling to the caller?
- From: Malcolm McLean
- Re: Why leave the error handling to the caller?
- From: Flash Gordon
- Re: Why leave the error handling to the caller?
- From: Malcolm McLean
- Re: Why leave the error handling to the caller?
- From: Richard Heathfield
- Re: Why leave the error handling to the caller?
- From: Christopher Benson-Manica
- Re: Why leave the error handling to the caller?
- From: Richard Heathfield
- Re: Why leave the error handling to the caller?
- From: Malcolm McLean
- Re: Why leave the error handling to the caller?
- From: Richard Heathfield
- Re: Why leave the error handling to the caller?
- From: Richard Harter
- Re: Why leave the error handling to the caller?
- From: CBFalconer
- Re: Why leave the error handling to the caller?
- Prev by Date: Re: Fill structure's fields in a loop ?
- Next by Date: Re: Why leave the error handling to the caller?
- Previous by thread: Re: Why leave the error handling to the caller?
- Next by thread: Re: Why leave the error handling to the caller?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|