Hi Bin,
Bin.Cheng <amker.ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ping.
We are seeking to clarify the standard wording around this (and the cases where
unhandled_exception() returns - hopefully during the WG21 meeting this week,
FWIW, I think your interpretation makes sense here.
thanks
Iain
>
> Thanks,
> bin
>
> On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 1:55 PM bin.cheng <bin.ch...@linux.alibaba.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Exception in coroutine is not correctly handled because the default
>> return_void call is now inserted before the finish suspend point,
>> rather than at the end of the original coroutine body. This patch
>> fixes the issue by generating following code:
>> co_await promise.initial_suspend();
>> try {
>> // The original coroutine body
>>
>> promise.return_void(); // The default return_void call.
>> } catch (...) {
>> promise.unhandled_exception();
>> }
>> final_suspend:
>> // ...
>>
>> Bootstrap and test on x86_64. Is it OK?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> bin
>>
>> gcc/cp
>> 2020-02-03 Bin Cheng <bin.ch...@linux.alibaba.com>
>>
>> * coroutines.cc (build_actor_fn): Factor out code inserting the
>> default return_void call to...
>> (morph_fn_to_coro): ...here, also hoist local var declarations.
>>
>> gcc/testsuite
>> 2020-02-03 Bin Cheng <bin.ch...@linux.alibaba.com>
>>
>> * g++.dg/coroutines/torture/co-ret-15-default-return_void.C: New.
