Exceptions in constructor?

[Mike Stump]

> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 09:19:43 -0500
> From: Paul Koning <pkoning@xedia.com>
> To: chip@pobox.com
> Cc: egcs@cygnus.com

> >>>>> "chip" == chip  <chip@atlantic.net> writes:

>  chip> I'm 99.44% pleased with the exception-based code I can now
>  chip> write and test under Linux on x86.  The remaining .56% would be
>  chip> fulfilled if throwing an exception in a constructor
>  chip> automatically called the appropriate operator delete () if
>  chip> there had been a call to operator new ().

> Does the C++ standard say to do that?  It would surprise me.

Be surprised then!

2 An object that is partially constructed will have destructors executed
  only  for its fully constructed sub-objects.  Should a constructor for
  an element  of  an  automatic  array  throw  an  exception,  only  the
  constructed  elements  of that array will be destroyed.  If the object
  or array was allocated in a  new-expression and  the    new-expression
  does not contain a  new-placement, the deallocation function (3.7.3.2,
  12.5) is called to free  the  storage  occupied  by  the  object;  the
  deallocation  function is chosen as specified in 5.3.4.  If the object
  or array was allocated in a  new-expression and  the    new-expression
  contains  a    new-placement,  the  storage  occupied by the object is
  deallocated only if an appropriate placement operator delete is found,
  as specified in 5.3.4.

You don't have to speculate what the standard says, just read it.  It
is online at http://www.cygnus.com/misc/wp/dec96pub/ .  Speculating
that the standard doesn't say things that is says just confuses others
that don't know what it says.