------- Comment #12 from wwashby at earthlink dot net 2009-08-29 11:27 ------- (In reply to comment #11) > (In reply to comment #10) > > > > I'm not sure that this applies in this situation. An instance of BadE is > > constructed because it is thrown, but BadE::BadE does not "[exit] via an > > uncaught exception". It both throws and catches an exception, and then > > returns > > normally. There is still an uncaught exception when BadE::BadE exits, but > > it > > is the one that caused BadE to be constructed, not the one that BadE::BadE > > has > > thrown (and caught). > > No, in [except.handle]/16 the standard says > > "The exception being handled is rethrown if control reaches the end of a > handler of the function-try-block of a constructor or destructor." > > You cannot swallow exceptions in a constructor's function-try-block, they will > be rethrown. > > > > 1,000 apologies, of course you are right; my own code and shows that (blush). Maybe uncaught_exception assumes that the throw BadE will succeed and doesn't notice that the BadE object is not fully constructed?
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41174
