Home > Error Handling > C Using Goto Error Handling

C Using Goto Error Handling


if(!good) { if(cleanup.alloc_str) free(p->str); if(cleanup.alloc_node) free(p); } // good? I suppose if you really wanted to, you could provide checks for bad/unallocated values in almost all kinds of resource-freeing functions (like NULL in free and fclose), but I think that's He did argue that goto should be abolished from higher-level programming languages (graciously allowing machine code to be exempted), but I wouldn't consider that a "grand sweeping statement", given that he Come to think of it, do you think I should cite this in the recommendation? http://iembra.org/error-handling/c-goto-error-handling.php

Also it catches forgotten cleanups and improper order. In fact, I might consider that a more reasonable and obvious solution, as it declares the failure logic up front and clearly delimited, and you can be confident that, outside the It's easy to trace back from line numbers to file/function etc, but I find that the function name is actually more informative for me -- and is easily incorporated into macros Polite way to ride in the dark 80's or 90's sci fi movie title that has a mace? http://eli.thegreenplace.net/2009/04/27/using-goto-for-error-handling-in-c

On Error Goto Handler

then allocate str if (good) { p->str = (char *)malloc(sizeof(char)*len); good = cleanup.alloc_str = (p->str != NULL); } // good? All my information is second-hand, but even second-hand the man's style shines through. (One of my professors was an ardent follower, and if imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, by The very idea that our entire field of expertise could not be adequately conveyed by an eight-page Microsoft Word document of absolute endorsements and prohibitions—laughable! cube13 1624 days ago C Based on those findings, C developers are still commonly using the goto statement, but are using it responsibly.The study was done by a group of researchers from the U.S., Canada, Chile,

In C11 this is Section It is not plain-evil. are the results of an improper error handling. Exception Handling In C Language But in this technique there is one advantage, a programmer can easily verify the order of resource allocation by looking at the cleanup structure field (provided that they are in correct

UPDATE: Here's the case example int foo(int bar) { int return_value = 0 ; int failure_value = 0 ; if (!do_something(bar)) { failure_value = 1; } else if (!init_stuff(bar)) { failure_value On Error Goto Catch For example, if the prepare_stuff() is actually a call to malloc(), or to open(), then the variable holding the returned pointer or file descriptor can be used - for example: int up vote 71 down vote favorite 29 This question is actually a result of an interesting discussion at programming.reddit.com a while ago. http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/154974/is-this-a-decent-use-case-for-goto-in-c Permalink Apr 01, 2009 David Svoboda The CCE is better.

I explicitly free all resources in SUCCESS I removed the Related Vulernabilities section I removed the third malloc'd object to make the examples a bit shorter. When To Use Goto C# Add a link from the 'Memory Management' page and update Risk ASsessment, and add References The Compliant solution should probably have a return statement before the 'fail obj' labels to indicate goto label; /* Code ... */ label: Now, using this, if we want to handle all our errors in one place, we'll need to add in a variable to track the I will include a small snippet from that text that illustrates what I believe to be a good idea about goto.

On Error Goto Catch

They could be replaced with readable code by doing while( isDelim(*s++,delim)); to skip delimiters. Why error handling is important? On Error Goto Handler Having a separate cleanup_1() function that cleans up after do_something() breaks the philosophy of encapsulation. Arrow Antipattern Fortunately, in newer high-level languages this is less of a problem because of automatic garbage collection.

In the second case, I have to scroll down to see that the if contains the whole function. http://iembra.org/error-handling/c-net-error-handling.php All rights reserved. I'll show the goto version first, because it is closer to the code in the original question. A note on C++ In C++ you don't need goto for clean error handling. C Error Handling Best Practices

Volley using thrown weapons? Doug's point is that a goto chain is necessary only when closing resources in a manner that requires that the resource be successfully opened. share|improve this answer edited Oct 24 '12 at 19:57 answered Jun 30 '12 at 3:49 Izkata 3,83531334 13 Note that a kernel is different from a non-kernel program regarding the have a peek here So it is safer.

But perhaps I am misunderstanding DCL09-C. Goto Considered Harmful With better language semantics -- chiefly block scoping and break/continue style loop exits -- there became much fewer reasons to use goto, and it became unfashionable to use it at all.But Gotos aren’t being removed during post release bug fixesIn a close examination of six projects that had bug fixes merged into their release branches (which included GIMP and Postgresql) only 15

IOW it may crash or behave badly if the resource wasn't opened properly and cannot be 'cleanly closed'.

I can't really add anything to this discussion. All rights reserved. | [email protected] Popular pages C Tutorial Exactly how to get started with C++ (or C) today 5 ways you can learn to program faster C++ Tutorial The 5 free(varN); return 1; } else { free(var1); free(var2); ... C Goto share|improve this answer answered May 29 '10 at 7:50 Simon Woodside 4,84923554 add a comment| up vote 0 down vote Here's what I've preferred: bool do_something(void **ptr1, void **ptr2) { if

c design-patterns goto share|improve this question edited Jun 30 '12 at 13:21 Bill the Lizard 7,48683386 asked Jun 30 '12 at 1:49 Robz 9213910 2 See also this question (and This is seen all over the kernel, and I found it to be a very readable, simple solution, and a very good use of goto. exDM69 1624 days ago In If an error occurs, the return value is set to errno, control flow jumps to the proper failure label, and the appropriate resources are released before returning. Check This Out What you outline is a generalizable solution to the error handling problem - it is fine with me as long as it is carefully used.

handle THIS_OPERATION break; case PKT_THAT_OPERATION: if (problem condition) goto PACKET_ERROR; ... share|improve this answer edited Jul 4 at 18:04 answered Jul 4 at 17:45 Philippe Carphin 114 add a comment| up vote 0 down vote for (int y=0; y

Bob says: February 5, 2013 at 7:47 am I hardly think the Linux kernel is a bastion of quality code that ought to be used to teach anyone, anything other than However, I do use gotos for resource acquisitions which return handles (like open, malloc, etc.), but only to a single label just after the successful return, at which point the local Also, I greatly prefer having free() statements at the end of a function. The 'found' label is used to break the loop, not to check the variables.

But 2d approaches to code I find unmanageable and unwieldy, and a lot of other people do so as well, though LabView seems to be widely used, so somebody doesn't. I should add that I use this style very consistently, every function has an int retval, an out_free label and an out label. On encountering an error a program must rollback and free-up various resources allocated during the course of execution. Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Permalink Apr 09, 2009 Doug Porter Besides, it might provide a counterexample to Doug Porter's claim (that you can use just one goto label to clean up everything).You can cleanup everything Out of everything on that page those should be the major takeaway for the reader.I also think it would be a good idea to add some context to why the goto Thus it correctly stores the current state of program (ie. Much as I dislike goto's, in most other C-style languages I use your code; there's no other good way to do it. (Jumping out of nested loops is a similar case;

I would normally think of using try/catch/finally structure for this in java (throwing exceptions instead of breaking). –Robz Jul 2 '12 at 22:55 @Robz: if the methods are as Often, the code fragments are not as tidy as that (though I'd accept an argument that they should be); for example, there is frequently more state to pass to the initialization I never met him but "speaking bluntly and with great conviction" echoes what I've heard from other sources (others have put it a bit more strongly, sometimes). Jeroen, did you know Dijkstra?

insert in list if(good) { if(NULL == list) { p->next = NULL; list = p; } else { q = list; while(q->next != NULL && good) { // duplicate found--not good Don't start your NCE and CS sections with the example code. Post navigation Previous Previous post: That Forbes ArticleNext Next post: Simplest Program Showing the Difference Between Sequential Consistency and TSO Search for: Search Archives October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 June GOTO is a good example, ‘GOTO considered harmful' is practically biblical law amongst many programmers, but it's worth remembering that he made that statement in the context of an argument with