A Study on the Effects of Exception Usage in Open-Source C++ Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exception handling (EH) is a feature common to many modern programming languages, including C++, Java, and Python, that allows error handling in client code to be performed in a way that is both systematic and largely detached from the implementation of the main functionality. However, C++ developers sometimes choose not to use EH, as they feel that its use increases complexity of the resulting code: new control flow paths are added to the code, "stack unwinding" adds extra responsibilities for the developer to worry about, and EH arguably detracts from the modular design of the system. In this paper, we perform an exploratory empirical study of the effects of exceptions usage in 2721 open source C++ systems taken from GitHub. We observed that the number of edges in an augmented call graph increases, on average, by 22% when edges for exception flow are added to a graph. Additionally, about 8 out of 9 functions that may throw only do so by propagating a throw from another function. These results suggest that, in practice, the use of C++ EH can add complexity to the design of the system that developers must strive to be aware of.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.125 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".