Skip to content

using noexcept in potentially throwing functions #1460

Discussion options

You must be logged in to vote

I don't get it. Why should we add these static assertions?

We are relying on some implicit thoughts about operations behaviour

These thoughts are explicit, since they are defined in unit tests.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.

I suspect you are trying to sell me "defensive programming" paradigm, where each function or procedure assumes the inputs may be incorrect.
MIPT-V does not use it. Instead, we prove there are no chances to generate these incorrect inputs.

Replies: 4 comments 1 reply

Comment options

You must be logged in to vote
0 replies
Comment options

You must be logged in to vote
0 replies
Comment options

You must be logged in to vote
0 replies
Answer selected by pavelkryukov
Comment options

You must be logged in to vote
1 reply
@pavelkryukov
Comment options

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
2 participants
Converted from issue

This discussion was converted from issue #1459 on February 28, 2021 17:03.