Re: [boost] The noexcept Specifier & Block

Subject: Re: [boost] The noexcept Specifier & Block
From: Alexander Terekhov (terekhov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-04-17 11:27:13

Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 6:55 AM, Alexander Terekhov <terekhov_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 7:11 PM, Alexander Terekhov <terekhov_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >> > Scott McMurray wrote:
> >> > [...]
> >> >> I don't see how you're going to get the "at throw point" you're asking for.
> >> >
> >> > Two-phase EH.
> >>
> >> An implementation strategy used by some compilers.  It is not
> >> something required by C++.  It is mysterious why some popular
> >> compilers insist on using that strategy when they know they are
> >> dealing with C++ applications.
> >
> > Because that strategy allows to not unwind the stack for unexpected
> > exceptions.
> 
> So, now we are talking of cost of doing something
> not required by C++ semantics; rarely used in practice,
> but with a cost imposed on those who don't want it.  A strategy
> that hurts performance of C++ programs.

Wow. Are you sure? Let all the folks like 

http://infocenter.arm.com/help/topic/com.arm.doc.ihi0038a/IHI0038A_ehabi.pdf

know about such disastrous nature of two-phase EH.

regards,
alexander.