🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4873sc$hum@gabi.gabi-soft.fr>,
   kanze@gabi-soft.fr (J. Kanze) wrote:
>Another interesting case:
>
>    A                   a1 ;
>    A                   a2 ;
>    A                   a3 ;
>    //  ...
>
>The constructor of a2 throws an exception (not caught, of course).  In
>no case can the compiler be allowed to call the destructor to a3.  All

Or a2 for that matter, at least not according to C++PL2 sec 9.4.1 par 2.

>of the compilers I've tested do.  Which in practice means that you
>cannot safely let an exception escape from a constructor unless you can
>guarantee that the type can never be used as a static variable with file
>scope.  (Gee, and I always thought that one of the main reasons for
>using exceptions was error reporting from constructors.)

Trying the above under BC++ 4.52, A::A() is called twice and then A::~A() is 
called once, which is correct.  Just out of curiosity, what compilers acted 
improperly?  Pls. email the answer if this is drifting off-topic for c.s.c++. 
 Thanks.

	[Moderator's note: personally I'd be inclined to say that discussion
	of which compilers are standard-conforming in some particular respect
	is appropriate for comp.std.c++.  If anyone has any comments or
	suggestions about the moderation policy, please send them to
	std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  -fjh.]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Herb Sutter                 2228 Urwin, Ste 102         voice (416) 618-0184
Connected Object Solutions  Oakville ON Canada L6L 2T2    fax (905) 847-6019
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  Submission address: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu.
  Contact address: std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  The moderation policy
  is summarized in http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt/std-c++/policy.html. ]