On 10.08.2011, at 03:14, John McCall wrote:
> On Aug 9, 2011, at 5:34 PM, Howard Hinnant wrote:
>> On Aug 9, 2011, at 8:24 PM, John McCall wrote:
>
>>> As far as I understand it, Sebastian introduced dependent (i.e. wrapped)
>>> exceptions in order to support capturing and rethrowing an arbitrary,
>>> potentially foreign exception via std::exception_ptr.
>>
>> In gcc, yes. And it is that design, described at a high level in
>> cxx-abi-dev, that I followed (the high level description in cxx-abi-dev, not
>> the code in gcc).
>
> I went and read through the cxx-abi-dev discussion, and I see the necessity
> of dependent exceptions now even for non-foreign exceptions.
Good. I would hate to think that I was mistaken back then and jumped through
all these hoops when a simpler design was available. I never considered foreign
exceptions - I don't actually think my design supports capturing them as
exception_ptrs.
> I would appreciate it if we changed the name in our implementation to
> "envelope exception" or something like that; overloading "dependent" is
> quite unfortunate.
That sounds good. I was never really happy with my old name.
Sebastian
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
