Re: is such exception handling approach good?

From:

"Ben Voigt [C++ MVP]" <rbv@nospam.nospam>

Newsgroups:

microsoft.public.vc.language

Date:

Mon, 24 Dec 2007 13:03:50 -0600

Message-ID:

<#KVuD#lRIHA.4152@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>

"Ben Voigt [C++ MVP]" <rbv@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:ebuG5vlRIHA.4400@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

"George" <George@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0751E682-FEF6-4EEF-8BD0-A8B30818973A@microsoft.com...

Thanks Alex,

Unless the caller of the constructor catches the exceptions and
take
appropriate operations to free the resources/memory, right?

Do you mean author of the constructor? Caller of the constructor
is a code that creates an object.

I mean the caller of the constructor. If the caller can catch the
exception
in the constructor, and take appropriate operations to free resources, I
think it is fine to throw exceptions in constructor. Is my understanding
correct?

The caller of the constructor cannot free the resources, because he hasn't
got a pointer to them (constructor failed and the pointer to the new
object was never set).

Only a function-try block on the constructor can free the resources.

oops, it can't either.

http://www.gotw.ca/gotw/066.htm

regards,
George

"Alex Blekhman" wrote:

"George" wrote:

I think if you are not using smart pointers, for the object
instances which
are already constructed on the heap, they will not be released
automatically
and there will be potential memory leak, right?

Correct.

Unless the caller of the constructor catches the exceptions and
take
appropriate operations to free the resources/memory, right?

Do you mean author of the constructor? Caller of the constructor
is a code that creates an object.

Alex