From 1987731010627408591 X-Google-Thread: f78e5,82cd3599ce330676 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gid7894ca11fe,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 13:20:08 -0500 Return-Path: To: (Usenet) From: Herb Sutter Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: throwing in a noexcept(true) function Organization: Forte Inc. http://www.forteinc.com/apn/ Sender: cppmods@cs.rpi.edu Approved: james.dennett@gmail.com Message-ID: References: <4BBE39E5.5000409@f2.dion.ne.jp> <4bbe48f9.86c3f10a.47b7.ffffcac4@mx.google.com> <4BBF001D.E0E17C69@web.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Original-Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 15:52:48 -0700 X-Submission-Address: std-c++@netlab.cs.rpi.edu Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 13:14:33 CST Lines: 38 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Trace: sv3-dCVSrmWvULRVHbwQaLWcHiGQ1HWcnIsj1PhBo0njkk7OU8qyygLfWQ+usE0/427WOFn0YNYBBYpbP1N!/K7BNjfQiZw7e0uOuwmKbFsz5wPXCyBiPnT4WnkIFLBUjMVqoLr6ovEOhwNBIH82qmzxYf+S X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.std.c++:2414 On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 11:57:24 CST, Alexander Terekhov wrote: >Herb Sutter wrote: BTW, note that I just dashed that reply off quickly intending it to be private email. I didn't notice until later that he'd cc'd the csc++ submission address and my email appeared here. :) >[... optimizations ...] > >> Whether we required unwinding or not, it's sufficient to just put a >> bit on the stack frame that is noexcept and checking it on the way out >> -- if( bNoExcept && exception_is_active() ) terminate();. > >Unwinding significantly reduces optimization opportunities. Allowing >unwinding for noexcept is EVIL! Sure, not requiring unwinding means you can optimize callees (as he quoted me saying already). But he seemed to be asking about the overhead imposed by noexecept itself, that's what I thought I was responding to in this part. Herb --- Herb Sutter (herbsutter.wordpress.com) (www.gotw.ca) Convener, SC22/WG21 (C++) (www.gotw.ca/iso) Architect, Visual C++ (www.gotw.ca/microsoft) -- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ] [ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@netlab.cs.rpi.edu] [ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ] [ FAQ: http://www.comeaucomputing.com/csc/faq.html ]