Menu
I know the rule is to NEVER throw one during a destructor, and I understand why. I would not dare do it. But even the C++ Faq Lite says that this rule is good 99% of the time. What is the other 1% that they fail to delve into?
Link to the C++ Faq Lite bullet point on throwing from ~():
861
The C++ rule is that you must never throw an exception from a destructor that is being called during the "stack unwinding" process of another exception. For example, if someone says throw Foo(), the stack will be unwound so all the stack frames between the throw Foo() and the } catch (Foo e) { will get popped.
Exceptions should be used for exceptional situations outside of the normal logic of a program. In the example program an out of range value is likely to be fairly common and should be dealt with using normal if-else type logic.
If the destructor of an object being destroyed during stack unrolling throws another exception which leaves the destructor, the C++ library will immediately terminate the program by calling the terminate() function.
Destructors are only called for the completely constructed objects. When the constructor of an object throws an exception, the destructor for that object is not called.
Just don't do it. If the stars and planets align in such a way that you find you need to...
Still don't do it.
173
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With
