Re: [rfc] fix libstdc++/10606

[Paolo Carlini <pcarlini at suse dot de>]

Richard Henderson wrote:

> The following implements the proposal Cary Coutant gave to
> the c++ abi devel list.
>  
Thanks.

> Does everyone agree that the test case attached is correct?
> Are there other cases that need to be considered?
>  
I'm forwarding below some comments that Martin (PR submitter and
author of the relevant DR) sent me privately:

"From the data array it seems that Richard chose to implement a slightly
different behavior than what's being proposed in issue 475:
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_active.html#475
According to bullet (4) of the proposed resolution, data[1] in the
test program should be { 1, 0, true }. I.e., uncaught_exception()
should return true immediately after completing the evaluation of
the operand of throw.

I happen to think that Richard's alternative is reasonable and even
more useful than what's proposed in the issue (and I've said so
repeatedly on the reflector) but no one else expressed that opinion
(actually, only Mike Miller and I participated in the discussion,
so it's a 50/50 split ;-) "

> Library folk: Is CXXABI_1.4 the correct version to give to
> this symbol?
>  
Maybe CXXABI_1.3.1 is more appropriate: after all we are only exporting
an additional symbol, right? Benjamin?

Thanks again,
Paolo.