This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Consistently using __throw_*


Jonathan Wakely wrote:

__throw (which boils down to either throw or abort)


If that is to be used in place of "throw;" then isn't that what
__throw_exception_again() is intended for?  It doesn't abort() but does
it need to?  Is it not enough to just let a "throw;" statement compile
with -fno-exceptions ?

If -fno-exceptions was given then we will already have aborted when the
original __throw_xxx function was run, unless the exception we've caught
was thrown by user code.


Indeed, I mean to add a __throw exactly for throws from "user code", that is
testcases (see, in particular, many cases in 27_io/basic_istream and ostream).
There are also a few instances in testsuite_abi.cc and testsuite_hooks.cc.


Ideally, we should be able to build and regtest cleanly with -fno-exceptions...

Paolo.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]