From f9a6a82af365f1389991dd65adad92f6726f38a0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Patrick Pelissier Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2017 22:25:04 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Update README --- README.md | 7 ++++++- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/README.md b/README.md index 2ffd39da..2207896a 100644 --- a/README.md +++ b/README.md @@ -491,7 +491,12 @@ The object remains in a valid (if previously valid) and unchanged state in this By default, the macro prints an error message and abort the program: handling non-trivial memory errors is hard, testing such cases is mandatory to avoid security holes, testing them is even harder, and this behavior is rather conservative. -It can be overloaded to handle other policy for error handling like: +Moreover a good program design should handle a process entire failure (using for examples multiple +processes for doing the job) so even a process stops can be recovered. +See [here](http://joeduffyblog.com/2016/02/07/the-error-model/) for more +information about why abandonment is good. + +It can however be overloaded to handle other policy for error handling like: * throwing an error (in which case, the user is responsible to free memory of the allocated objects - destructor can still be called), * set a global error and handle it when the function returns,