> I don't think you did, I think you just said it has downsides over and over.
Show evidence of your claim.
> Don't ask for basic knowledge then get upset when you get it.
Where did I ask for basic knowledge? You are hallucinating. I've repeatedly and explicitly told you to shut up explaining beginner things. You are trying to refute my criticisms of RAII with your silly explanations of how RAII works. That's not how an argument or "evidence" works.
> Exceptions aren't uncontrolled flow and you can also not use them.
I would rather call it _implicit_ flow but they also lead to losing control over control flow because of that. Yes, I can just not use exceptions, and also avoid gotos and use them in a principle way, and do cleanup in a principled way. And then I can also do without RAII and without all the baggage I'd have to buy into in order to use it.
> You don't have an explanation of why the burden of proof is on me.
Please p* off man. You're being ridiculous.
> It means memory leaks and crashes which everyone has been fighting for 50 years.
Like you have been on your Linux, Windows, or Mac machine? Maybe you are running a linux machine with an uptime of weeks, months, or even years?
> Someone running a marathon without shoes doesn't mean shoes are bad.
You claiming to run a marathon with a 25kg backpack doesn't mean you don't lie, and it also doesn't prove running without it isn't the better approach.
> Why can't you give a single basic explanation instead of making the same claim over and over?
The only person not giving explanation beyond basic boring introductory C++ RAII school, that's YOU my friend. I've been giving a lot of explanations what I think is problematic, somehow it seems you're mentally unable to acknowledge them.
> I don't think you did, I think you just said it has downsides over and over.
Show evidence of your claim.
That would be proving a negative, which is another logical fallacy.
Please p off man. You're being ridiculous.*
If that were true you could explain why.
I would rather call it _implicit_ flow but they also lead to losing control over control flow because of that
But it's just running something you need to run anyway and it's optional. Destructors don't need branching, they can just run a single function like free.
And then I can also do without RAII and without all the baggage I'd have to buy into in order to use it.
Again the "baggage" is the part you can't seem to explain.
Like you have been on your Linux, Windows, or Mac machine? Maybe you are running a linux machine with an uptime of weeks, months, or even years?
Are you trying to say people never write memory leaks or forget to clean up resources in C? Something being done with huge amounts of efforts doesn't mean a better way to do things is bad.
You claiming to run a marathon with a 25kg backpack doesn't mean you don't lie, and it also doesn't prove running without it isn't the better approach.
This doesn't mean anything. Now you're trying to say (without evidence) that someone is lying? Destructors don't add any size to a program.
Is this your only argument after dozens of messages? Running a function with no branching destroys control flow and running a tiny function that runs what you need to call anyway is bloat?
I've been giving a lot of explanations what I think is problematic,
No, you just said it's problematic over and over, that's not an explanation.
Show evidence of your claim.
> Don't ask for basic knowledge then get upset when you get it.
Where did I ask for basic knowledge? You are hallucinating. I've repeatedly and explicitly told you to shut up explaining beginner things. You are trying to refute my criticisms of RAII with your silly explanations of how RAII works. That's not how an argument or "evidence" works.
> Exceptions aren't uncontrolled flow and you can also not use them.
I would rather call it _implicit_ flow but they also lead to losing control over control flow because of that. Yes, I can just not use exceptions, and also avoid gotos and use them in a principle way, and do cleanup in a principled way. And then I can also do without RAII and without all the baggage I'd have to buy into in order to use it.
> You don't have an explanation of why the burden of proof is on me.
Please p* off man. You're being ridiculous.
> It means memory leaks and crashes which everyone has been fighting for 50 years.
Like you have been on your Linux, Windows, or Mac machine? Maybe you are running a linux machine with an uptime of weeks, months, or even years?
> Someone running a marathon without shoes doesn't mean shoes are bad.
You claiming to run a marathon with a 25kg backpack doesn't mean you don't lie, and it also doesn't prove running without it isn't the better approach.
> Why can't you give a single basic explanation instead of making the same claim over and over?
The only person not giving explanation beyond basic boring introductory C++ RAII school, that's YOU my friend. I've been giving a lot of explanations what I think is problematic, somehow it seems you're mentally unable to acknowledge them.