This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Inclusion in an official release of a new throw-like qualifier
On Apr 10, 2007, at 2:06 PM, Sergio Giro wrote:
Maybe I missed some point: why everything should be rewritten?
Let me try again. The standard way to add a new qualifier in g++, is
to add it in an attribute, please do that. The possible responses
are, no, I want to be different, or ok. If you choose the former,
you have to back your position. For throw specs, that attribute is
the standard one that goes on the function/method. The name or the
spec can be statically_check_eh_spec, or something less verbose.
The only bad thing here is that you have two qualifiers having
similar meanings...
Ding.
But I think it must be that way
No, this is incorrect.
in order to _avoid_ rewriting code.
The point here is that, in order to do this, you need
interprocedural analysis.
You've not yet grasped they are isomorphic forms. If the above is
true, then then below is wrong. If the below is not wrong, then the
above must be wrong. Your pick.
If you have qualifiers as the one I describe, you can perform the
check by merely using the prototypes...
So, what do you think now?
Unchanged.