So if uncaughtException may be removed in the future, does that mean every node.js process will have at least 1 domain?

If so, I was under the impression domains had some kind of performance penalty? If not, it seems like dropping uncaughtException gives us no control over what happens when something blows up (by default)?

So if uncaughtException may be removed in the future, does that mean every node.js process will have at least 1 domain?

Perhaps - details are TBD. uncaughtException is beyond redemption though, it's fundamentally broken.

If not, it seems like dropping uncaughtException gives us no control over what happens when something blows up (by default)?

You say that as if it's a bad thing. :-)

@bnoordhuis I think that one of alternatives is to introduce globalDomain like

var globalDomain = require('domain').globalDomain;
globalDomain.on('error', function(e) {
  console.log(e.message);
});
function f() {
  throw new Error('foo');
}
f();

This can be easily implemented as

--- a/lib/domain.js
+++ b/lib/domain.js
@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ var endMethods = ['end', 'abort', 'destroy', 'destroySoon'];
 // communicate with events module, but don't require that
 // module to have to load this one, since this module has
 // a few side effects.
-events.usingDomains = true;
+events.usingDomains = exports.usingDomains = true;

 exports.Domain = Domain;

@@ -253,3 +253,15 @@ Domain.prototype.dispose = function() {
   // so that it can't be entered or activated.
   this._disposed = true;
 };
+
+Object.defineProperty(exports, 'globalDomain', {
+  get: function() {
+    var globalDomain = new Domain();
+    if (exports.active) {
+      stack.push(globalDomain);
+    } else {
+      globalDomain.enter();
+    }
+    return globalDomain;
+  }
+});

How do you like it?

Since domains is still an experimental feature, I'd prefer not to force it on people just yet. We're still working out bugs and odd edge cases, and might change its behavior significantly in 0.9, depending on what we learn from people using it over the next few months.

@shigeki Looks like a reasonable approach to me.

[EDIT: hadn't noticed that @isaacs already commented.]

@isaacs The change of document in this commit indicates to use domain instead of uncaughtException event. I think we should provide alternative solutions to make the most use of domain.

uncaughtException is useful for doing things to log exception, otherwise you don't know why something died

  process.on('uncaughtException', function(e) {
    log(e)
    process.exit()
  })