220 34259 article Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Ville Voutilainen Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Proposal to add constructors to std::bad_alloc exception class. Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2017 00:02:14 +0300 Lines: 34 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: References: <5044931.e35jvUQpKU@tjmaciei-mobl1> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1504299745 10817 195.159.176.226 (1 Sep 2017 21:02:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2017 21:02:25 +0000 (UTC) To: "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBC5JHI7A7ALRBV4VU7GQKGQEXEI2GNA@isocpp.org Fri Sep 01 23:02:20 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-qt0-f200.google.com ([209.85.216.200]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dnt4r-0001x2-Ez for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Fri, 01 Sep 2017 23:02:09 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-qt0-f200.google.com with SMTP id e2sf1205176qta.4 for ; Fri, 01 Sep 2017 14:02:16 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; t=1504299736; cv=pass; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=CJDRVybBNjp4IouAhCG/nd0MpWTmKZkb3MRKr7URUmHkxX0Jgig8JZ1XVDcsrzPLnu UyVk6Koo+VlNyhvthPbWckko4Ct78c4BFFkBsab1pRNW91KpzOTYVp34fU1B1p3fU5I8 FiwSJLjTTS6NX7AZL3xMe0OcaFm2PxoZtDS6AAzP/bca6h3DYqW6+D/2SkIQlYiMxrXA R1FUYqu3oPJzSCgGMhnVhlAOcQsxUoqwN7VRY5UiefjgdkAgmh2tR6zr88HdZrpfJI8F DbSL66fLqRtst1WbaV4bXrxdb8MVo88AcaVW6mRjKMH3tufSr6TcVTfl4cAsIeEKwzya GwkQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:reply-to:to:subject:message-id:date :from:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:arc-authentication-results :arc-message-signature:dkim-signature:arc-authentication-results; bh=L7teERvyPPTmsxR5pr3yWMlCCht2T/dr83WGEUC94/k=; b=mjvkc5nXfX3CFM3O803pDk2KlBaEitK0fJTS3UvhpGkfSQaQXA8rlwjNiojoOCpwri 7f7w6vHgNTK9fcM6eDtcULHkrf20kCA81VfAgXOUdPGRJ/Y0R3kdbwQdhq8/9yYgMpUV vEeHRcYbbwhS0fw2yFHh7R9XppXwp8bDad7lQ4eDj3sitib1bgqa41gQaotw9cPTZ3zu 8j1M2+mUHljyyqDUW98AdpmjalyxTpG2/GDaVdfw6A0kfERWPNoSxYZoBApz6jkscUhn bIBsn9E9PZ7MB0tB2TnVen8uY7vbr/QzhyIneWBwaqUn38+PVcEKOo3zev2pHqPo1fuW 015w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=2; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=C4939+po; spf=pass (google.com: domain of ville.voutilainen@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.65 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=ville.voutilainen@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=isocpp-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=L7teERvyPPTmsxR5pr3yWMlCCht2T/dr83WGEUC94/k=; b=1T9TDrUP8j2EeZakYxONjk3Ys8MEaXGKrUbBEkV09D2Id4tiLULX5/B7xS40PsfZQt jHj0s6waQSDhNzqgl5HzIpaJAX7LQKCfsA2NIxB8ynoXAwb4fT4J2Vh2CNks9T3JGHEY FR9FUoqxlSqm2Xr+6C0TF/Xl2t43csi3KAxlBV/Ofxt8Yyy/us9sXcVRbXeNnFDOZSzx VcnotTkW7d5qALY/5WJiG0coHgJ5sVWwIDEqJTSrGe69q9qUtbeB3y1C/qfLvMpd6j15 uEg7WZEK6GmtuRwZT7qM+MeZPHCo6a7zV5pgrWC3sDi8PWTUurNFjt2F1IrnjrzF/4l9 xfNA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-spam-checked-in-group:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=L7teERvyPPTmsxR5pr3yWMlCCht2T/dr83WGEUC94/k=; b=sDvi62RLjQ3TqQ5EXW4XEJBkiL4/mGDgprvjtsUorxtn3VfaEDhOaOZF3aMPOPUr0D xD9khfvVXYuhT8S1HFYgTt2+LQ+msiinEuGMuaoo1vp+0y3GyrWBBC4ue6gpjpkin8dA qJi/5sERtnN0SpmFlHvAkqwhN+M1MLMNAyXRCVGDRCNHUtfYjRQs/2LvfPf7JQbF7uhR n7c1FOY380LL/vBdffZ9wvjikoVcWRDaMPsc/whRVmqxqDKeg+xNMWnwrRkfxggXAEli q07WQQPaglBBoNq8VPtaIRYHOUhB3bG6Mqy3ijU+AOsWkE7w4krga2C1QVH9tf2BVgKR Iapw== X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUgrt4Q5jKl96TZeuzre4p7fhj+HGHDyRf2DfPmkEApwmA2o8wZe 5qWWk1TeyZUpt726 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADKCNb7WlkQDH8j/HyIHFi5gnJyCIMfwR/lH5i/70ThtyrodLe8N3QjJHZ9Rtw7FEjZEZHV0xOmSVA== X-Received: by 10.237.63.41 with SMTP id p38mr3686257qtf.13.1504299736335; Fri, 01 Sep 2017 14:02:16 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.36.107.84 with SMTP id v81ls1589953itc.6.canary-gmail; Fri, 01 Sep 2017 14:02:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.31.236.4 with SMTP id k4mr2067570vkh.75.1504299735108; Fri, 01 Sep 2017 14:02:15 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1504299735; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=iU9T1biB25tixaOggbidspY7FVqjQM3IUOARVeWugzm0zf2eekFMWfPpN8Q05lbQzW 5CMuWcDxkGRifo/WTc5LHQsomBoso1RxYMqkNm6neJ6sNVUEaHggCOkhL7LN33VTK425 HxRMOKhHgNEUgX5FH48ttvaH8qz7KLBdotBchZIU8Iu4oD+A3NbPAL7tLTzPOFuYPCg0 b001PF1AhuA1vlFQV4/4qrIwCSlfLxHHAdMsKEVF2dw7No0BHGkimD5H0eg6ojgqacMO 2z4pjIsyZg6/yDJf3gaspBNf/99BOskuqcjrmF/qT9o2GxnQRsdC5CTNQ7JgCOKrkgy5 EswA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :dkim-signature:arc-authentication-results; bh=LoPV0ors4ta8FNrJk05NfrX/tXcDq0U7p+4S/O1syqg=; b=pSF+92N6/jhNG9DSp2uqFNbAKMsxZH1FD8ggd9VJnovEBwUVKzGn6GctdMJIucibKL janxDopj9YZRpPtX3nxa/U1q/SYJQwSIDCHGD/Ml+E7x8VsIphBFXkWjF0CGsIufyumN qA6DVN9k+OZnYePTeOLDJg+ZbJArl1B8XvTdrE21ihtd6OWqzBtrCi7F0u3rHH5jxKQY d4ce/Ib1MBe6gk3Sb/wb/LyvMEleLTf24gGiubyfFX9BWCrW8ZpcYlh8iuTx/EucTVAA aSTIxN19p6f6yf5KjzubaW69QGwSOi5naDOQ3Yh1Al2GybmDpjOhQRUHDvPk5syniPDp 62CA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=C4939+po; spf=pass (google.com: domain of ville.voutilainen@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.65 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=ville.voutilainen@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Original-Received: from mail-sor-f65.google.com (mail-sor-f65.google.com. [209.85.220.65]) by mx.google.com with SMTPS id l2sor700701vki.66.2017.09.01.14.02.15 for (Google Transport Security); Fri, 01 Sep 2017 14:02:15 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of ville.voutilainen@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.65 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.220.65; X-Received: by 10.31.226.69 with SMTP id z66mr1852606vkg.79.1504299734629; Fri, 01 Sep 2017 14:02:14 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.103.103.135 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Sep 2017 14:02:14 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5044931.e35jvUQpKU@tjmaciei-mobl1> X-Original-Sender: ville.voutilainen@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=C4939+po; spf=pass (google.com: domain of ville.voutilainen@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.65 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=ville.voutilainen@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list std-proposals@isocpp.org; contact std-proposals+owners@isocpp.org List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 399137483710 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals:34259 Archived-At: On 1 September 2017 at 23:57, Thiago Macieira wrote: > On Friday, 1 September 2017 12:28:44 PDT Rich Sposato wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I wrote this proposal after discovering the std::bad_alloc exception class >> only has a default >> constructor. Other exception classes have constructors with a string >> parameter. The lack of a similar constructor in bad_alloc has caused >> problems for me. >> >> This is the second draft of this proposal. Please provide feedback on how >> to improve it before I submit it. > > This breaks binary compatibility by changing the size of bad_alloc. So there > needs to be a VERY good reason for this to happen. That means that at least one implementation vendor will oppose it (not automatically just because, but because that VERY good reason needs to be so strong that the vendor goes "oh yeah that's a bad bug that should've been fixed ages ago", and that's not the case here), and that at least two NBs will comment on it and that one of them will oppose it before it can land. This proposal is now fighting an uphill battle. Why can't the problem be solved by a new exception type? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org. To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/d/msgid/std-proposals/CAFk2RUY0h%2B%2BB%2BnMoG%2B-a1ujSu7qBN6DYOG7G31OjeJXnj4f2Qg%40mail.gmail.com. .