This is an unofficial snapshot of the ISO/IEC JTC1 SC22 WG21 Core Issues List revision 116a. See http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/ for the official list.
2024-12-19
[Voted into the WP at the February, 2012 meeting; moved to DR at the October, 2012 meeting.]
It is not clear whether the unexpected handler will be invoked in the following example:
#include <iostream> #include <exception> struct A { ~A() throw() { } }; struct B { ~B() noexcept { } }; struct C : A, B { ~C() { throw 0; } }; void unexpected_observer() { std::cerr << "unexpected called" << std::endl; std::terminate(); } int main() { std::set_unexpected(unexpected_observer); C c; }
The problem is 14.5 [except.spec] paragraph 14 only says that the exception-specification of C::~C “shall allow no exceptions,” which could mean either throw() or noexcept(true).
Proposed resolution (August, 2011):
Change 14.5 [except.spec] paragraph 14 as follows:
An implicitly declared special member function (11.4.4 [special])
shall havehas an exception-specification. If f is an implicitly declared default constructor, copy constructor, move constructor, destructor, copy assignment operator, or move assignment operator, its implicit exception-specification specifies the type-id T if and only if T is allowed by the exception-specification of a function directly invoked by f's implicit definition; fshall allowallows all exceptions if any function it directly invokes allows all exceptions, and fshall allow no exceptionshas the exception-specification noexcept(true) if every function it directly invokes allows no exceptions. [Example:struct A { A(); A(const A&) throw(); A(A&&) throw(); ~A() throw(X); }; struct B { B() throw(); B(const B&) throw(); B(B&&) throw(Y); ~B() throw(Y); }; struct D : public A, public B { // Implicit declaration of D::D(); // Implicit declaration of D::D(const D&)throw()noexcept(true); // Implicit declaration of D::D(D&&) throw(Y); // Implicit declaration of D::~D() throw(X, Y); };Furthermore, if...