Re: throw specs on Standard destructors

[Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>]

Nathan Myers <ncm-nospam@cantrip.org> writes:

| On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 10:05:17AM -0600, Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
| > 
| > >>> Third, any code that depends on tight throw specs in libstdc++
| > >>> would not be portable to other implementations. 
| > 
| > >Any code that depends on tight throw specs of Standard-conformant
| > >implementations would not be portable to GCC.
| > 
| > ... which is far more of an issue, I think. 
| 
| No.  An implementation is not required to declare destructors throw().
| Any code that fails if they're not so declared is broken, because it
| assumes an implementation detail that the standard doesn't specify.  
| 
| It's the worst kind of broken: testing fails to detect the error 
| until the code is moved.  We're doing him an enormous favor by 
| refusing to compile his code.  Wherever he's moving it from failed
| to do him that favor.
| 
| As I noted earlier, if we do add any "throw()" specs, for performance
| reasons, we should wrap them in "#ifndef NDEBUG" so that we can continue
| to provide the service of reporting this error.


I think Nathan says nicely what I would have probably phrased poorly.

Sorry for a "me too" message, but what Nathan expresses just happens
to match my reading.

-- Gaby