| 1 | \chapter{Exception Features} | 
|---|
| 2 |  | 
|---|
| 3 | This chapter covers the design and user interface of the \CFA | 
|---|
| 4 | exception-handling mechanism. | 
|---|
| 5 |  | 
|---|
| 6 | \section{Virtuals} | 
|---|
| 7 | Virtual types and casts are not part of the exception system nor are they | 
|---|
| 8 | required for an exception system. But an object-oriented style hierarchy is a | 
|---|
| 9 | great way of organizing exceptions so a minimal virtual system has been added | 
|---|
| 10 | to \CFA. | 
|---|
| 11 |  | 
|---|
| 12 | The pattern of a simple hierarchy was borrowed from object-oriented | 
|---|
| 13 | programming was chosen for several reasons. | 
|---|
| 14 | The first is that it allows new exceptions to be added in user code | 
|---|
| 15 | and in libraries independently of each other. Another is it allows for | 
|---|
| 16 | different levels of exception grouping (all exceptions, all IO exceptions or | 
|---|
| 17 | a particular IO exception). Also it also provides a simple way of passing | 
|---|
| 18 | data back and forth across the throw. | 
|---|
| 19 |  | 
|---|
| 20 | Virtual types and casts are not required for a basic exception-system but are | 
|---|
| 21 | useful for advanced exception features. However, \CFA is not object-oriented so | 
|---|
| 22 | there is no obvious concept of virtuals. Hence, to create advanced exception | 
|---|
| 23 | features for this work, I needed to design and implement a virtual-like | 
|---|
| 24 | system for \CFA. | 
|---|
| 25 |  | 
|---|
| 26 | % NOTE: Maybe we should but less of the rational here. | 
|---|
| 27 | Object-oriented languages often organized exceptions into a simple hierarchy, | 
|---|
| 28 | \eg Java. | 
|---|
| 29 | \begin{center} | 
|---|
| 30 | \setlength{\unitlength}{4000sp}% | 
|---|
| 31 | \begin{picture}(1605,612)(2011,-1951) | 
|---|
| 32 | \put(2100,-1411){\vector(1, 0){225}} | 
|---|
| 33 | \put(3450,-1411){\vector(1, 0){225}} | 
|---|
| 34 | \put(3550,-1411){\line(0,-1){225}} | 
|---|
| 35 | \put(3550,-1636){\vector(1, 0){150}} | 
|---|
| 36 | \put(3550,-1636){\line(0,-1){225}} | 
|---|
| 37 | \put(3550,-1861){\vector(1, 0){150}} | 
|---|
| 38 | \put(2025,-1490){\makebox(0,0)[rb]{\LstBasicStyle{exception}}} | 
|---|
| 39 | \put(2400,-1460){\makebox(0,0)[lb]{\LstBasicStyle{arithmetic}}} | 
|---|
| 40 | \put(3750,-1460){\makebox(0,0)[lb]{\LstBasicStyle{underflow}}} | 
|---|
| 41 | \put(3750,-1690){\makebox(0,0)[lb]{\LstBasicStyle{overflow}}} | 
|---|
| 42 | \put(3750,-1920){\makebox(0,0)[lb]{\LstBasicStyle{zerodivide}}} | 
|---|
| 43 | \end{picture}% | 
|---|
| 44 | \end{center} | 
|---|
| 45 | The hierarchy provides the ability to handle an exception at different degrees | 
|---|
| 46 | of specificity (left to right). Hence, it is possible to catch a more general | 
|---|
| 47 | exception-type in higher-level code where the implementation details are | 
|---|
| 48 | unknown, which reduces tight coupling to the lower-level implementation. | 
|---|
| 49 | Otherwise, low-level code changes require higher-level code changes, \eg, | 
|---|
| 50 | changing from raising @underflow@ to @overflow@ at the low level means changing | 
|---|
| 51 | the matching catch at the high level versus catching the general @arithmetic@ | 
|---|
| 52 | exception. In detail, each virtual type may have a parent and can have any | 
|---|
| 53 | number of children. A type's descendants are its children and its children's | 
|---|
| 54 | descendants. A type may not be its own descendant. | 
|---|
| 55 |  | 
|---|
| 56 | The exception hierarchy allows a handler (@catch@ clause) to match multiple | 
|---|
| 57 | exceptions, \eg a base-type handler catches both base and derived | 
|---|
| 58 | exception-types. | 
|---|
| 59 | \begin{cfa} | 
|---|
| 60 | try { | 
|---|
| 61 | ... | 
|---|
| 62 | } catch(arithmetic &) { | 
|---|
| 63 | ... // handle arithmetic, underflow, overflow, zerodivide | 
|---|
| 64 | } | 
|---|
| 65 | \end{cfa} | 
|---|
| 66 | Most exception mechanisms perform a linear search of the handlers and select | 
|---|
| 67 | the first matching handler, so the order of handers is now important because | 
|---|
| 68 | matching is many to one. | 
|---|
| 69 |  | 
|---|
| 70 | Each virtual type needs an associated virtual table. A virtual table is a | 
|---|
| 71 | structure with fields for all the virtual members of a type. A virtual type has | 
|---|
| 72 | all the virtual members of its parent and can add more. It may also update the | 
|---|
| 73 | values of the virtual members and often does. | 
|---|
| 74 |  | 
|---|
| 75 | While much of the virtual infrastructure is created, it is currently only used | 
|---|
| 76 | internally for exception handling. The only user-level feature is the virtual | 
|---|
| 77 | cast, which is the same as the \Cpp \lstinline[language=C++]|dynamic_cast|. | 
|---|
| 78 | \label{p:VirtualCast} | 
|---|
| 79 | \begin{cfa} | 
|---|
| 80 | (virtual TYPE)EXPRESSION | 
|---|
| 81 | \end{cfa} | 
|---|
| 82 | Note, the syntax and semantics matches a C-cast, rather than the function-like | 
|---|
| 83 | \Cpp syntax for special casts. Both the type of @EXPRESSION@ and @TYPE@ must be | 
|---|
| 84 | a pointer to a virtual type. | 
|---|
| 85 | The cast dynamically checks if the @EXPRESSION@ type is the same or a subtype | 
|---|
| 86 | of @TYPE@, and if true, returns a pointer to the | 
|---|
| 87 | @EXPRESSION@ object, otherwise it returns @0p@ (null pointer). | 
|---|
| 88 |  | 
|---|
| 89 | \section{Exception} | 
|---|
| 90 | % Leaving until later, hopefully it can talk about actual syntax instead | 
|---|
| 91 | % of my many strange macros. Syntax aside I will also have to talk about the | 
|---|
| 92 | % features all exceptions support. | 
|---|
| 93 |  | 
|---|
| 94 | Exceptions are defined by the trait system; there are a series of traits, and | 
|---|
| 95 | if a type satisfies them, then it can be used as an exception. The following | 
|---|
| 96 | is the base trait all exceptions need to match. | 
|---|
| 97 | \begin{cfa} | 
|---|
| 98 | trait is_exception(exceptT &, virtualT &) { | 
|---|
| 99 | virtualT const & get_exception_vtable(exceptT *); | 
|---|
| 100 | }; | 
|---|
| 101 | \end{cfa} | 
|---|
| 102 | The trait is defined over two types, the exception type and the virtual table | 
|---|
| 103 | type. This should be one-to-one, each exception type has only one virtual | 
|---|
| 104 | table type and vice versa. The only assertion in the trait is | 
|---|
| 105 | @get_exception_vtable@, which takes a pointer of the exception type and | 
|---|
| 106 | returns a reference to the virtual table type instance. | 
|---|
| 107 |  | 
|---|
| 108 | The function @get_exception_vtable@ is actually a constant function. | 
|---|
| 109 | Recardless of the value passed in (including the null pointer) it should | 
|---|
| 110 | return a reference to the virtual table instance for that type. | 
|---|
| 111 | The reason it is a function instead of a constant is that it make type | 
|---|
| 112 | annotations easier to write as you can use the exception type instead of the | 
|---|
| 113 | virtual table type; which usually has a mangled name. | 
|---|
| 114 | % Also \CFA's trait system handles functions better than constants and doing | 
|---|
| 115 | % it this way reduce the amount of boiler plate we need. | 
|---|
| 116 |  | 
|---|
| 117 | % I did have a note about how it is the programmer's responsibility to make | 
|---|
| 118 | % sure the function is implemented correctly. But this is true of every | 
|---|
| 119 | % similar system I know of (except Agda's I guess) so I took it out. | 
|---|
| 120 |  | 
|---|
| 121 | There are two more traits for exceptions @is_termination_exception@ and | 
|---|
| 122 | @is_resumption_exception@. They are defined as follows: | 
|---|
| 123 |  | 
|---|
| 124 | \begin{cfa} | 
|---|
| 125 | trait is_termination_exception( | 
|---|
| 126 | exceptT &, virtualT & | is_exception(exceptT, virtualT)) { | 
|---|
| 127 | void defaultTerminationHandler(exceptT &); | 
|---|
| 128 | }; | 
|---|
| 129 |  | 
|---|
| 130 | trait is_resumption_exception( | 
|---|
| 131 | exceptT &, virtualT & | is_exception(exceptT, virtualT)) { | 
|---|
| 132 | void defaultResumptionHandler(exceptT &); | 
|---|
| 133 | }; | 
|---|
| 134 | \end{cfa} | 
|---|
| 135 |  | 
|---|
| 136 | In other words they make sure that a given type and virtual type is an | 
|---|
| 137 | exception and defines one of the two default handlers. These default handlers | 
|---|
| 138 | are used in the main exception handling operations \see{Exception Handling} | 
|---|
| 139 | and their use will be detailed there. | 
|---|
| 140 |  | 
|---|
| 141 | However all three of these traits can be trickly to use directly. | 
|---|
| 142 | There is a bit of repetition required but | 
|---|
| 143 | the largest issue is that the virtual table type is mangled and not in a user | 
|---|
| 144 | facing way. So there are three macros that can be used to wrap these traits | 
|---|
| 145 | when you need to refer to the names: | 
|---|
| 146 | @IS_EXCEPTION@, @IS_TERMINATION_EXCEPTION@ and @IS_RESUMPTION_EXCEPTION@. | 
|---|
| 147 |  | 
|---|
| 148 | All take one or two arguments. The first argument is the name of the | 
|---|
| 149 | exception type. Its unmangled and mangled form are passed to the trait. | 
|---|
| 150 | The second (optional) argument is a parenthesized list of polymorphic | 
|---|
| 151 | arguments. This argument should only with polymorphic exceptions and the | 
|---|
| 152 | list will be passed to both types. | 
|---|
| 153 | In the current set-up the base name and the polymorphic arguments have to | 
|---|
| 154 | match so these macros can be used without losing flexability. | 
|---|
| 155 |  | 
|---|
| 156 | For example consider a function that is polymorphic over types that have a | 
|---|
| 157 | defined arithmetic exception: | 
|---|
| 158 | \begin{cfa} | 
|---|
| 159 | forall(Num | IS_EXCEPTION(Arithmetic, (Num))) | 
|---|
| 160 | void some_math_function(Num & left, Num & right); | 
|---|
| 161 | \end{cfa} | 
|---|
| 162 |  | 
|---|
| 163 | \section{Exception Handling} | 
|---|
| 164 | \CFA provides two kinds of exception handling, termination and resumption. | 
|---|
| 165 | These twin operations are the core of the exception handling mechanism and | 
|---|
| 166 | are the reason for the features of exceptions. | 
|---|
| 167 | This section will cover the general patterns shared by the two operations and | 
|---|
| 168 | then go on to cover the details each individual operation. | 
|---|
| 169 |  | 
|---|
| 170 | Both operations follow the same set of steps to do their operation. They both | 
|---|
| 171 | start with the user preforming a throw on an exception. | 
|---|
| 172 | Then there is the search for a handler, if one is found than the exception | 
|---|
| 173 | is caught and the handler is run. After that control returns to normal | 
|---|
| 174 | execution. | 
|---|
| 175 |  | 
|---|
| 176 | If the search fails a default handler is run and then control | 
|---|
| 177 | returns to normal execution immediately. That is where the default handlers | 
|---|
| 178 | @defaultTermiationHandler@ and @defaultResumptionHandler@ are used. | 
|---|
| 179 |  | 
|---|
| 180 | \subsection{Termination} | 
|---|
| 181 | \label{s:Termination} | 
|---|
| 182 |  | 
|---|
| 183 | Termination handling is more familiar kind and used in most programming | 
|---|
| 184 | languages with exception handling. | 
|---|
| 185 | It is dynamic, non-local goto. If a throw is successful then the stack will | 
|---|
| 186 | be unwound and control will (usually) continue in a different function on | 
|---|
| 187 | the call stack. They are commonly used when an error has occured and recovery | 
|---|
| 188 | is impossible in the current function. | 
|---|
| 189 |  | 
|---|
| 190 | % (usually) Control can continue in the current function but then a different | 
|---|
| 191 | % control flow construct should be used. | 
|---|
| 192 |  | 
|---|
| 193 | A termination throw is started with the @throw@ statement: | 
|---|
| 194 | \begin{cfa} | 
|---|
| 195 | throw EXPRESSION; | 
|---|
| 196 | \end{cfa} | 
|---|
| 197 | The expression must return a reference to a termination exception, where the | 
|---|
| 198 | termination exception is any type that satifies @is_termination_exception@ | 
|---|
| 199 | at the call site. | 
|---|
| 200 | Through \CFA's trait system the functions in the traits are passed into the | 
|---|
| 201 | throw code. A new @defaultTerminationHandler@ can be defined in any scope to | 
|---|
| 202 | change the throw's behavior (see below). | 
|---|
| 203 |  | 
|---|
| 204 | The throw will copy the provided exception into managed memory. It is the | 
|---|
| 205 | user's responcibility to ensure the original exception is cleaned up if the | 
|---|
| 206 | stack is unwound (allocating it on the stack should be sufficient). | 
|---|
| 207 |  | 
|---|
| 208 | Then the exception system searches the stack using the copied exception. | 
|---|
| 209 | It starts starts from the throw and proceeds to the base of the stack, | 
|---|
| 210 | from callee to caller. | 
|---|
| 211 | At each stack frame, a check is made for resumption handlers defined by the | 
|---|
| 212 | @catch@ clauses of a @try@ statement. | 
|---|
| 213 | \begin{cfa} | 
|---|
| 214 | try { | 
|---|
| 215 | GUARDED_BLOCK | 
|---|
| 216 | } catch (EXCEPTION_TYPE$\(_1\)$ * NAME$\(_1\)$) { | 
|---|
| 217 | HANDLER_BLOCK$\(_1\)$ | 
|---|
| 218 | } catch (EXCEPTION_TYPE$\(_2\)$ * NAME$\(_2\)$) { | 
|---|
| 219 | HANDLER_BLOCK$\(_2\)$ | 
|---|
| 220 | } | 
|---|
| 221 | \end{cfa} | 
|---|
| 222 | When viewed on its own a try statement will simply exceute the statements in | 
|---|
| 223 | @GUARDED_BLOCK@ and when those are finished the try statement finishes. | 
|---|
| 224 |  | 
|---|
| 225 | However, while the guarded statements are being executed, including any | 
|---|
| 226 | functions they invoke, all the handlers following the try block are now | 
|---|
| 227 | or any functions invoked from those | 
|---|
| 228 | statements, throws an exception, and the exception | 
|---|
| 229 | is not handled by a try statement further up the stack, the termination | 
|---|
| 230 | handlers are searched for a matching exception type from top to bottom. | 
|---|
| 231 |  | 
|---|
| 232 | Exception matching checks the representation of the thrown exception-type is | 
|---|
| 233 | the same or a descendant type of the exception types in the handler clauses. If | 
|---|
| 234 | it is the same of a descendent of @EXCEPTION_TYPE@$_i$ then @NAME@$_i$ is | 
|---|
| 235 | bound to a pointer to the exception and the statements in @HANDLER_BLOCK@$_i$ | 
|---|
| 236 | are executed. If control reaches the end of the handler, the exception is | 
|---|
| 237 | freed and control continues after the try statement. | 
|---|
| 238 |  | 
|---|
| 239 | If no handler is found during the search then the default handler is run. | 
|---|
| 240 | Through \CFA's trait system the best match at the throw sight will be used. | 
|---|
| 241 | This function is run and is passed the copied exception. After the default | 
|---|
| 242 | handler is run control continues after the throw statement. | 
|---|
| 243 |  | 
|---|
| 244 | There is a global @defaultTerminationHandler@ that cancels the current stack | 
|---|
| 245 | with the copied exception. However it is generic over all exception types so | 
|---|
| 246 | new default handlers can be defined for different exception types and so | 
|---|
| 247 | different exception types can have different default handlers. | 
|---|
| 248 |  | 
|---|
| 249 | \subsection{Resumption} | 
|---|
| 250 | \label{s:Resumption} | 
|---|
| 251 |  | 
|---|
| 252 | Resumption exception handling is a less common form than termination but is | 
|---|
| 253 | just as old~\cite{Goodenough75} and is in some sense simpler. | 
|---|
| 254 | It is a dynamic, non-local function call. If the throw is successful a | 
|---|
| 255 | closure will be taken from up the stack and executed, after which the throwing | 
|---|
| 256 | function will continue executing. | 
|---|
| 257 | These are most often used when an error occured and if the error is repaired | 
|---|
| 258 | then the function can continue. | 
|---|
| 259 |  | 
|---|
| 260 | A resumption raise is started with the @throwResume@ statement: | 
|---|
| 261 | \begin{cfa} | 
|---|
| 262 | throwResume EXPRESSION; | 
|---|
| 263 | \end{cfa} | 
|---|
| 264 | The semantics of the @throwResume@ statement are like the @throw@, but the | 
|---|
| 265 | expression has return a reference a type that satifies the trait | 
|---|
| 266 | @is_resumption_exception@. The assertions from this trait are available to | 
|---|
| 267 | the exception system while handling the exception. | 
|---|
| 268 |  | 
|---|
| 269 | At runtime, no copies are made. As the stack is not unwound the exception and | 
|---|
| 270 | any values on the stack will remain in scope while the resumption is handled. | 
|---|
| 271 |  | 
|---|
| 272 | Then the exception system searches the stack using the provided exception. | 
|---|
| 273 | It starts starts from the throw and proceeds to the base of the stack, | 
|---|
| 274 | from callee to caller. | 
|---|
| 275 | At each stack frame, a check is made for resumption handlers defined by the | 
|---|
| 276 | @catchResume@ clauses of a @try@ statement. | 
|---|
| 277 | \begin{cfa} | 
|---|
| 278 | try { | 
|---|
| 279 | GUARDED_BLOCK | 
|---|
| 280 | } catchResume (EXCEPTION_TYPE$\(_1\)$ * NAME$\(_1\)$) { | 
|---|
| 281 | HANDLER_BLOCK$\(_1\)$ | 
|---|
| 282 | } catchResume (EXCEPTION_TYPE$\(_2\)$ * NAME$\(_2\)$) { | 
|---|
| 283 | HANDLER_BLOCK$\(_2\)$ | 
|---|
| 284 | } | 
|---|
| 285 | \end{cfa} | 
|---|
| 286 | If the handlers are not involved in a search this will simply execute the | 
|---|
| 287 | @GUARDED_BLOCK@ and then continue to the next statement. | 
|---|
| 288 | Its purpose is to add handlers onto the stack. | 
|---|
| 289 | (Note, termination and resumption handlers may be intermixed in a @try@ | 
|---|
| 290 | statement but the kind of throw must be the same as the handler for it to be | 
|---|
| 291 | considered as a possible match.) | 
|---|
| 292 |  | 
|---|
| 293 | If a search for a resumption handler reaches a try block it will check each | 
|---|
| 294 | @catchResume@ clause, top-to-bottom. | 
|---|
| 295 | At each handler if the thrown exception is or is a child type of | 
|---|
| 296 | @EXCEPTION_TYPE@$_i$ then the a pointer to the exception is bound to | 
|---|
| 297 | @NAME@$_i$ and then @HANDLER_BLOCK@$_i$ is executed. After the block is | 
|---|
| 298 | finished control will return to the @throwResume@ statement. | 
|---|
| 299 |  | 
|---|
| 300 | Like termination, if no resumption handler is found, the default handler | 
|---|
| 301 | visible at the throw statement is called. It will use the best match at the | 
|---|
| 302 | call sight according to \CFA's overloading rules. The default handler is | 
|---|
| 303 | passed the exception given to the throw. When the default handler finishes | 
|---|
| 304 | execution continues after the throw statement. | 
|---|
| 305 |  | 
|---|
| 306 | There is a global @defaultResumptionHandler@ is polymorphic over all | 
|---|
| 307 | termination exceptions and preforms a termination throw on the exception. | 
|---|
| 308 | The @defaultTerminationHandler@ for that throw is matched at the original | 
|---|
| 309 | throw statement (the resumption @throwResume@) and it can be customized by | 
|---|
| 310 | introducing a new or better match as well. | 
|---|
| 311 |  | 
|---|
| 312 | % \subsubsection? | 
|---|
| 313 |  | 
|---|
| 314 | A key difference between resumption and termination is that resumption does | 
|---|
| 315 | not unwind the stack. A side effect that is that when a handler is matched | 
|---|
| 316 | and run it's try block (the guarded statements) and every try statement | 
|---|
| 317 | searched before it are still on the stack. This can lead to the recursive | 
|---|
| 318 | resumption problem. | 
|---|
| 319 |  | 
|---|
| 320 | The recursive resumption problem is any situation where a resumption handler | 
|---|
| 321 | ends up being called while it is running. | 
|---|
| 322 | Consider a trivial case: | 
|---|
| 323 | \begin{cfa} | 
|---|
| 324 | try { | 
|---|
| 325 | throwResume (E &){}; | 
|---|
| 326 | } catchResume(E *) { | 
|---|
| 327 | throwResume (E &){}; | 
|---|
| 328 | } | 
|---|
| 329 | \end{cfa} | 
|---|
| 330 | When this code is executed the guarded @throwResume@ will throw, start a | 
|---|
| 331 | search and match the handler in the @catchResume@ clause. This will be | 
|---|
| 332 | call and placed on the stack on top of the try-block. The second throw then | 
|---|
| 333 | throws and will seach the same try block and put call another instance of the | 
|---|
| 334 | same handler leading to an infinite loop. | 
|---|
| 335 |  | 
|---|
| 336 | This situation is trivial and easy to avoid, but much more complex cycles | 
|---|
| 337 | can form with multiple handlers and different exception types. | 
|---|
| 338 |  | 
|---|
| 339 | To prevent all of these cases we mask sections of the stack, or equvilantly | 
|---|
| 340 | the try statements on the stack, so that the resumption seach skips over | 
|---|
| 341 | them and continues with the next unmasked section of the stack. | 
|---|
| 342 |  | 
|---|
| 343 | A section of the stack is marked when it is searched to see if it contains | 
|---|
| 344 | a handler for an exception and unmarked when that exception has been handled | 
|---|
| 345 | or the search was completed without finding a handler. | 
|---|
| 346 |  | 
|---|
| 347 | % This might need a diagram. But it is an important part of the justification | 
|---|
| 348 | % of the design of the traversal order. | 
|---|
| 349 | \begin{verbatim} | 
|---|
| 350 | throwResume2 ----------. | 
|---|
| 351 | |                 | | 
|---|
| 352 | generated from handler       | | 
|---|
| 353 | |                 | | 
|---|
| 354 | handler              | | 
|---|
| 355 | |                 | | 
|---|
| 356 | throwResume1 -----.   : | 
|---|
| 357 | |             |   : | 
|---|
| 358 | try            |   : search skip | 
|---|
| 359 | |             |   : | 
|---|
| 360 | catchResume  <----'   : | 
|---|
| 361 | |                 | | 
|---|
| 362 | \end{verbatim} | 
|---|
| 363 |  | 
|---|
| 364 | The rules can be remembered as thinking about what would be searched in | 
|---|
| 365 | termination. So when a throw happens in a handler; a termination handler | 
|---|
| 366 | skips everything from the original throw to the original catch because that | 
|---|
| 367 | part of the stack has been unwound, a resumption handler skips the same | 
|---|
| 368 | section of stack because it has been masked. | 
|---|
| 369 | A throw in a default handler will preform the same search as the original | 
|---|
| 370 | throw because; for termination nothing has been unwound, for resumption | 
|---|
| 371 | the mask will be the same. | 
|---|
| 372 |  | 
|---|
| 373 | The symmetry with termination is why this pattern was picked. Other patterns, | 
|---|
| 374 | such as marking just the handlers that caught, also work but lack the | 
|---|
| 375 | symmetry whih means there is more to remember. | 
|---|
| 376 |  | 
|---|
| 377 | \section{Conditional Catch} | 
|---|
| 378 | Both termination and resumption handler clauses can be given an additional | 
|---|
| 379 | condition to further control which exceptions they handle: | 
|---|
| 380 | \begin{cfa} | 
|---|
| 381 | catch (EXCEPTION_TYPE * NAME ; CONDITION) | 
|---|
| 382 | \end{cfa} | 
|---|
| 383 | First, the same semantics is used to match the exception type. Second, if the | 
|---|
| 384 | exception matches, @CONDITION@ is executed. The condition expression may | 
|---|
| 385 | reference all names in scope at the beginning of the try block and @NAME@ | 
|---|
| 386 | introduced in the handler clause. If the condition is true, then the handler | 
|---|
| 387 | matches. Otherwise, the exception search continues as if the exception type | 
|---|
| 388 | did not match. | 
|---|
| 389 | \begin{cfa} | 
|---|
| 390 | try { | 
|---|
| 391 | f1 = open( ... ); | 
|---|
| 392 | f2 = open( ... ); | 
|---|
| 393 | ... | 
|---|
| 394 | } catch( IOFailure * f ; fd( f ) == f1 ) { | 
|---|
| 395 | // only handle IO failure for f1 | 
|---|
| 396 | } | 
|---|
| 397 | \end{cfa} | 
|---|
| 398 | Note, catching @IOFailure@, checking for @f1@ in the handler, and reraising the | 
|---|
| 399 | exception if not @f1@ is different because the reraise does not examine any of | 
|---|
| 400 | remaining handlers in the current try statement. | 
|---|
| 401 |  | 
|---|
| 402 | \section{Rethrowing} | 
|---|
| 403 | \colour{red}{From Andrew: I recomend we talk about why the language doesn't | 
|---|
| 404 | have rethrows/reraises instead.} | 
|---|
| 405 |  | 
|---|
| 406 | \label{s:Rethrowing} | 
|---|
| 407 | Within the handler block or functions called from the handler block, it is | 
|---|
| 408 | possible to reraise the most recently caught exception with @throw@ or | 
|---|
| 409 | @throwResume@, respectively. | 
|---|
| 410 | \begin{cfa} | 
|---|
| 411 | try { | 
|---|
| 412 | ... | 
|---|
| 413 | } catch( ... ) { | 
|---|
| 414 | ... throw; | 
|---|
| 415 | } catchResume( ... ) { | 
|---|
| 416 | ... throwResume; | 
|---|
| 417 | } | 
|---|
| 418 | \end{cfa} | 
|---|
| 419 | The only difference between a raise and a reraise is that reraise does not | 
|---|
| 420 | create a new exception; instead it continues using the current exception, \ie | 
|---|
| 421 | no allocation and copy. However the default handler is still set to the one | 
|---|
| 422 | visible at the raise point, and hence, for termination could refer to data that | 
|---|
| 423 | is part of an unwound stack frame. To prevent this problem, a new default | 
|---|
| 424 | handler is generated that does a program-level abort. | 
|---|
| 425 |  | 
|---|
| 426 | \section{Finally Clauses} | 
|---|
| 427 | Finally clauses are used to preform unconditional clean-up when leaving a | 
|---|
| 428 | scope. They are placed at the end of a try statement: | 
|---|
| 429 | \begin{cfa} | 
|---|
| 430 | try { | 
|---|
| 431 | GUARDED_BLOCK | 
|---|
| 432 | } ... // any number or kind of handler clauses | 
|---|
| 433 | ... finally { | 
|---|
| 434 | FINALLY_BLOCK | 
|---|
| 435 | } | 
|---|
| 436 | \end{cfa} | 
|---|
| 437 | The @FINALLY_BLOCK@ is executed when the try statement is removed from the | 
|---|
| 438 | stack, including when the @GUARDED_BLOCK@ finishes, any termination handler | 
|---|
| 439 | finishes or during an unwind. | 
|---|
| 440 | The only time the block is not executed is if the program is exited before | 
|---|
| 441 | the stack is unwound. | 
|---|
| 442 |  | 
|---|
| 443 | Execution of the finally block should always finish, meaning control runs off | 
|---|
| 444 | the end of the block. This requirement ensures always continues as if the | 
|---|
| 445 | finally clause is not present, \ie finally is for cleanup not changing control | 
|---|
| 446 | flow. Because of this requirement, local control flow out of the finally block | 
|---|
| 447 | is forbidden. The compiler precludes any @break@, @continue@, @fallthru@ or | 
|---|
| 448 | @return@ that causes control to leave the finally block. Other ways to leave | 
|---|
| 449 | the finally block, such as a long jump or termination are much harder to check, | 
|---|
| 450 | and at best requiring additional run-time overhead, and so are mearly | 
|---|
| 451 | discouraged. | 
|---|
| 452 |  | 
|---|
| 453 | Not all languages with exceptions have finally clauses. Notably \Cpp does | 
|---|
| 454 | without it as descructors serve a similar role. Although destructors and | 
|---|
| 455 | finally clauses can be used in many of the same areas they have their own | 
|---|
| 456 | use cases like top-level functions and lambda functions with closures. | 
|---|
| 457 | Destructors take a bit more work to set up but are much easier to reuse while | 
|---|
| 458 | finally clauses are good for once offs and can include local information. | 
|---|
| 459 |  | 
|---|
| 460 | \section{Cancellation} | 
|---|
| 461 | Cancellation is a stack-level abort, which can be thought of as as an | 
|---|
| 462 | uncatchable termination. It unwinds the entirety of the current stack, and if | 
|---|
| 463 | possible forwards the cancellation exception to a different stack. | 
|---|
| 464 |  | 
|---|
| 465 | Cancellation is not an exception operation like termination or resumption. | 
|---|
| 466 | There is no special statement for starting a cancellation; instead the standard | 
|---|
| 467 | library function @cancel_stack@ is called passing an exception. Unlike a | 
|---|
| 468 | throw, this exception is not used in matching only to pass information about | 
|---|
| 469 | the cause of the cancellation. | 
|---|
| 470 | (This also means matching cannot fail so there is no default handler either.) | 
|---|
| 471 |  | 
|---|
| 472 | After @cancel_stack@ is called the exception is copied into the exception | 
|---|
| 473 | handling mechanism's memory. Then the entirety of the current stack is | 
|---|
| 474 | unwound. After that it depends one which stack is being cancelled. | 
|---|
| 475 | \begin{description} | 
|---|
| 476 | \item[Main Stack:] | 
|---|
| 477 | The main stack is the one used by the program main at the start of execution, | 
|---|
| 478 | and is the only stack in a sequential program. Even in a concurrent program | 
|---|
| 479 | the main stack is only dependent on the environment that started the program. | 
|---|
| 480 | Hence, when the main stack is cancelled there is nowhere else in the program | 
|---|
| 481 | to notify. After the stack is unwound, there is a program-level abort. | 
|---|
| 482 |  | 
|---|
| 483 | \item[Thread Stack:] | 
|---|
| 484 | A thread stack is created for a @thread@ object or object that satisfies the | 
|---|
| 485 | @is_thread@ trait. A thread only has two points of communication that must | 
|---|
| 486 | happen: start and join. As the thread must be running to perform a | 
|---|
| 487 | cancellation, it must occur after start and before join, so join is used | 
|---|
| 488 | for communication here. | 
|---|
| 489 | After the stack is unwound, the thread halts and waits for | 
|---|
| 490 | another thread to join with it. The joining thread checks for a cancellation, | 
|---|
| 491 | and if present, resumes exception @ThreadCancelled@. | 
|---|
| 492 |  | 
|---|
| 493 | There is a subtle difference between the explicit join (@join@ function) and | 
|---|
| 494 | implicit join (from a destructor call). The explicit join takes the default | 
|---|
| 495 | handler (@defaultResumptionHandler@) from its calling context, which is used if | 
|---|
| 496 | the exception is not caught. The implicit join does a program abort instead. | 
|---|
| 497 |  | 
|---|
| 498 | This semantics is for safety. If an unwind is triggered while another unwind | 
|---|
| 499 | is underway only one of them can proceed as they both want to ``consume'' the | 
|---|
| 500 | stack. Letting both try to proceed leads to very undefined behaviour. | 
|---|
| 501 | Both termination and cancellation involve unwinding and, since the default | 
|---|
| 502 | @defaultResumptionHandler@ preforms a termination that could more easily | 
|---|
| 503 | happen in an implicate join inside a destructor. So there is an error message | 
|---|
| 504 | and an abort instead. | 
|---|
| 505 | \todo{Perhaps have a more general disucssion of unwind collisions before | 
|---|
| 506 | this point.} | 
|---|
| 507 |  | 
|---|
| 508 | The recommended way to avoid the abort is to handle the intial resumption | 
|---|
| 509 | from the implicate join. If required you may put an explicate join inside a | 
|---|
| 510 | finally clause to disable the check and use the local | 
|---|
| 511 | @defaultResumptionHandler@ instead. | 
|---|
| 512 |  | 
|---|
| 513 | \item[Coroutine Stack:] A coroutine stack is created for a @coroutine@ object | 
|---|
| 514 | or object that satisfies the @is_coroutine@ trait. A coroutine only knows of | 
|---|
| 515 | two other coroutines, its starter and its last resumer. Of the two the last | 
|---|
| 516 | resumer has the tightest coupling to the coroutine it activated and the most | 
|---|
| 517 | up-to-date information. | 
|---|
| 518 |  | 
|---|
| 519 | Hence, cancellation of the active coroutine is forwarded to the last resumer | 
|---|
| 520 | after the stack is unwound. When the resumer restarts, it resumes exception | 
|---|
| 521 | @CoroutineCancelled@, which is polymorphic over the coroutine type and has a | 
|---|
| 522 | pointer to the cancelled coroutine. | 
|---|
| 523 |  | 
|---|
| 524 | The resume function also has an assertion that the @defaultResumptionHandler@ | 
|---|
| 525 | for the exception. So it will use the default handler like a regular throw. | 
|---|
| 526 | \end{description} | 
|---|