Disallow catch without parameter ("LastCatch")

[Leandro Lucarella]

grauzone, el 26 de octubre a las 08:44 me escribiste:
> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> >grauzone, el 25 de octubre a las 12:09 me escribiste:
> >>Right now, you can catch every exception with "try { something; }
> >>catch { somethingelse; }".
> >>
> >>Can we get rid of this abomination before D2 is finalized? I claim
> >>that it's completely useless, and even more so, every single use of
> >>this is a bug.
> >
> >Why every use of this is a bug?
> 
> Because you most likely catch more exception types than you really
> want. For example, a novice programmer is likely to write something
> like this:
> 
> int x;
> try {
>  x = convert(somestring);
> } catch {
>  //convert throws some exception if convert() fails
>  return -1;
> }
> 
> This is a bug, because catch might catch and *hide* a runtime error
> like failing assertions. The programmer really wanted to write
> "catch (ConversionException e)". Even if he wrote "catch (Exception
> e)", he wouldn't catch runtime errors, and the code would be safe.

OK, I see. What about rewriting:

try {
	foo();
} catch {
	something();
}

As:

try {
	foo();
} catch (Exception) {
	something();
}

(I mean the compiler)?

I think a catch all is a nice feature for quick&dirty scripts, it would be
nice to keep it and fix the semantics.

-- 
Leandro Lucarella (AKA luca)                     http://llucax.com.ar/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145  104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Y cuando llegamos a nuestro hogar ella saca de su bolsillo derecho un
casete de Ricardo Montaner y nos dice: "Ponelo! Ponelo!"; nos
desilusionamos un poco, pero a esa altura... Todo da igual.
	-- Sidharta Kiwi