https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98861

--- Comment #27 from cqwrteur <unlvsur at live dot com> ---
> But portable code can't rely on deterministict exceptions either, yet you
> insist that it's essential and you can't live without it. It seems you're
> quite happy to rely on non-standard things when it suits you, but when it
> doesn't it's completely unusable. Because you're a timewaster.

It will be portable when it is a part of the C++ standard.

> (In reply to cqwrteur from comment #25)
> > I mean you can try to fix it a little. However, it breaks ABI.
> 
> So do deterministic exceptions.

It does not. No existing code will be broken because of deterministic
exceptions.

> Please go away and write your own compiler or language.

Rust folks did that. Are you happy with it?

I have no interest in writing my own compiler or language. I am more interested
in how to fixing existing things. I was a lover of C++ EH and I completely hate
C++ exceptions when I understand the ugliness beneath it. That is why
deterministic exceptions are important.

Same with C++ iostream, they need to be replaced with something else too.

Reply via email to