Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

C++ says “We have try... finally at home”

devblogs.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 152 posts

Re: C++ says “We have try... finally at home”

#61

Post by mort96 »

rramadass wrote: post #43
mort96 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah it's a huge mistake IMO. I see it fucking up titles so frequently, and it flies in the face of the "do not editorialise titles" rule: [...] please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize. It is much worse, I think, to regularly drastically change the meaning of a title automatically until a moderator happens to notice to change it back, than to allow the occasional somewha…

You can always contact hn@ycombinator.com to point out errors of this nature and have it corrected by one of the mods.

It has been up with the incorrect title for over 7 hours now. That's most of the Hacker News front-page lifecycle. The system for correcting bad automatic editorialisation clearly isn't working well enough.

Re: C++ says “We have try... finally at home”

#62

Post by mort96 »

sigwinch28 wrote: post #24
winternewt wrote: post #21

Destructors are vastly superior to the finally keyword because they only require us to remember a single time to release resources (in the destructor) as opposed to every finally clause. For example, a file always closes itself when it goes out of scope instead of having to be explicitly closed by the person who opened the file. Syntax is also less cluttered with less indentation, especially when multiple objects are…

A writable file closing itself when it goes out of scope is usually not great, since errors can occur when closing the file, especially when using networked file systems. https://github.com/isocpp/CppCoreGuidelines/issues/2203

You need to close it and check for errors as part of the happy path. But it's great that in the error path (be that using an early return or throwing an exception), you can just forget about the file and you will never leak a file descriptor.

You may need to unlink the file in the error path, but that's best handled in the destructor of a class which encapsulates the whole "write to a temp file, rename into place, unlink on error" flow.

Re: C++ says “We have try... finally at home”

#63

Post by rramadass »

mort96 wrote: post #61
rramadass wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can always contact hn@ycombinator.com to point out errors of this nature and have it corrected by one of the mods.

It has been up with the incorrect title for over 7 hours now. That's most of the Hacker News front-page lifecycle. The system for correcting bad automatic editorialisation clearly isn't working well enough.

Oh, come on man! These are trivial bugs. Whoever noticed it first should have sent the email to the mods. I did it before i posted my previous comment and i now see that the title has been changed appropriately.

Re: C++ says “We have try... finally at home”

#65

Post by rramadass »

tryfinally wrote: post #4

I always wonder whether C++ syntax ever becomes readable when you sink more time into it, and if so - how much brain rewiring we would observe on a functional MRI.

This is just a low-effort comment.

> whether C++ syntax ever becomes readable when you sink more time into it,

Yes, and the easy approach is to learn as you need/go.

Re: C++ says “We have try... finally at home”

#66

Post by [deleted] »

ninkendo wrote: post #44
mojuba wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know Rust but, can this `defer` evaluate after the `return` statement is evaluated like in Swift? Because in Swift you can do this: func atomic_get_and_inc() -> Int { sem.wait() defer { value += 1 sem.signal() } return value }

EDIT: I don’t think you can actually put a return in a defer, I may have misremembered, it’s been several years. Disregard this comment chain. It gets even better in swift, because you can put the return statement in the defer, creating a sort of named return value: func getInt() -> Int { let i: Int // declared but not // defined yet! defer { return i } // all code paths must define i // exactly once, or it’s a compi…

[deleted]

Re: C++ says “We have try... finally at home”

#67

Post by kibwen »

ninkendo wrote: post #44
mojuba wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know Rust but, can this `defer` evaluate after the `return` statement is evaluated like in Swift? Because in Swift you can do this: func atomic_get_and_inc() -> Int { sem.wait() defer { value += 1 sem.signal() } return value }

EDIT: I don’t think you can actually put a return in a defer, I may have misremembered, it’s been several years. Disregard this comment chain. It gets even better in swift, because you can put the return statement in the defer, creating a sort of named return value: func getInt() -> Int { let i: Int // declared but not // defined yet! defer { return i } // all code paths must define i // exactly once, or it’s a compi…

This control flow is wacky. Please never do this.

Re: C++ says “We have try... finally at home”

#68

Post by [deleted] »

mojuba wrote: post #53
ninkendo wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EDIT: I don’t think you can actually put a return in a defer, I may have misremembered, it’s been several years. Disregard this comment chain. It gets even better in swift, because you can put the return statement in the defer, creating a sort of named return value: func getInt() -> Int { let i: Int // declared but not // defined yet! defer { return i } // all code paths must define i // exactly once, or it’s a compi…

Huh, I didn't know about `return` in `defer`, but is it really useful?

[deleted]

Re: C++ says “We have try... finally at home”

#69

Post by pelorat »

vidarh wrote: post #13
jasode wrote: post #2

The submitted title is missing the salient keyword "finally" that motivates the blog post. The actual subtitle Raymond Chen wrote is: "C++ says “We have try…finally at home.”" It's a snowclone based on the meme, "Mom, can we get ? No, we have at home." : https://www.google.com/search?q=%22we+have+x+at+home%22+meme In other words, Raymond is saying... "We already have Java feature of 'finally' at home in the C++ refri…

I'm curious about the actual origin now, given that a quick search shows only vague references or claim it is recent, but this meme is present in Eddie Murphys "Raw" from 1987, so it is at least that old.

Sounds like a perfect fit for some Deep Research.

Edit: A deep research run by Gemini 3.0 Pro says the origin is likely to be stand-up comedy routines between 1983–1987 and particularly mentions Eddie Murphy, and the 1983 socioeconomic precursor "You ain't got no McDonald's money" in Delirious (1983) culminating in the meme from in Raw (1987). So Eddie might very well be the original origin.

Post reply on HN