The extent of trust in errors and error handling

Chris Wright via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at
Mon Feb 6 09:10:46 PST 2017

On Sun, 05 Feb 2017 23:48:07 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
> This discussion has come up repeatedly on this forum. Many people
> strongly disagree with me, and believe that they can recover from Errors
> and continue executing the program.
> That's fine if the program's output is nothing one cares about, such as
> a game or a music player. If the program's failure could result in the
> loss of money, property, health or lives, it is unacceptable.

Assuming there is no intervening process whereby a human will investigate 
errors by hand after the program completes. Assuming that crashing results 
in less loss of money or lives than marching on.

In Google Compute Engine billing, it was *always* worse for us if our 
billing jobs failed than if they completed with reported errors. If the 
job failed, it was difficult to investigate. If it completed with errors, 
we could investigate in a straightforward way, and the errors being 
reported meant the data was held aside and not automatically sent to the 
payment processor.

More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list