From 2688253352275332618 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!news4.google.com!news2.google.com!npeer02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.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: Fri, 02 Apr 2010 11:40:08 -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: austern@google.com Message-ID: References: <4BB4D8B0.3070603@f2.dion.ne.jp> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Original-Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2010 00:29:42 -0700 X-Submission-Address: std-c++@netlab.cs.rpi.edu Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 11:37:55 CST Lines: 46 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Trace: sv3-13uNz0+s/NmuCsHZWM2FgGga1XVWjlE+u34M+3hypaIjvaZ7FR/ooNtjRILYN48xZyA/PsDbC4V5ywV!cJiagnrc3Tla/EvL6q3kdiCoYsupAlzZ90aPdp9g4RXaBKyNxDU0XNJxkUb0/11f39vAV1TX 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++:2363 On Fri, 2 Apr 2010 00:06:38 CST, Kazutoshi Satoda wrote: >To summarize, the main two points of view that were expressed were >>> that that trying to propagate an exception out of a noexcept function >>> should result in: >>> a) All bets off: Undefined behavior [...] >>> b) Termination: [...] >>> The committee has currently penciled in (b). >>> >> Another choice that was suggested by some members of the BSI C++ Panel is: >> c) implementation-defined behaviour >> > >How about static checking? > >d) Render them ill-formed if possible (and terminate if not) It looks like you posted this *just* after April 1 was over. :-) But to give a serious answer, since the above is a frequently asked question: The trouble with (d) is that then you get all the problems Java gets with statically checked exceptions, such as that that scheme doesn't work at all with templates (what exactly would you write?) and even when it does work more often than not quickly devolves into the meaningless "throw(exception)". As often as I hear a C++ programmer wish their exception specifications had Java's static semantics, I hear a Java programmer wish theirs had non-static semantics. 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 ]