🚀 go-pugleaf

> ==========Steve Clamage, 11/18/95==========
> 
> Apart from all of that, it is unlikely to be a good idea to throw
> an exception from a destructor. It would be safer and less likely
> to leave the program in an unknown state to use some other error-
> reporting method for destructors.

In some cases, it would seem that not allowing exceptions
to be thrown from destructors would be problematic rather
than helpful.  To leave destructors as a "blind spot" for detecting
and reporting exceptions seems to be a very bad idea.
I do not see why destructors are seen as poor stepchildren
relative to all other contexts.  This view will make for a basic
inconsistency in the language.  The rules must be more uniform
or they will make a mess of it.  You have to continue to
destruct pieces in reverse order.  Throwing an exception
in a destructor is merely a special return from that piece of
destruction analogous to the constructor case.

To the contrare.

Good Day
Dick
Dick.Menninger@DaytonOH.ATTGIS.COM
---
[ 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. ]