This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [3.3] Followup to C++ forced unwinding
- From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
- To: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, ncm at cantrip dot org, drepper at redhat dot com
- Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 19:40:59 -0700
- Subject: Re: [3.3] Followup to C++ forced unwinding
- References: <20030430175335.GA18958@twiddle.net> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20030430210342.GB697@redhat.com> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 10:24:24PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> Actually, I have an idea for how to DTRT here: give terminate() as the
> destructor for the exception object in the forced unwind case. So if the
> catch(...) block rethrows, all is good, but if we exit the catch block some
> other way, we try to clean up the exception, which calls terminate.
Oh, cool. This is a *much* nicer idea than I was contemplating.
Yes, I can agree to this. Uli, does this satisfy?