On Monday 26 August 2024 13:12:55 GMT-7 Thiago Macieira wrote: > "Q_ASSERT don't affect noexceptness" > > Or > > "noexcept(false) if you call other, noexcept(false) functions from your > code", which includes all the pthread cancellation points in glibc. Since > qt_assert is noexcept, Q_ASSERT is not included. This is very easy to > implement with a static checker. > > We could be more complex, with "Q_ASSERT that check preconditions imply > noexcept(false) but Q_ASSERT that verify the state of the internal invariant > against corruption don't". This would not be easy to implement with a > static checker.
What is the rule for dereferencing pointers? Imagine a function that does: Q_ASSERT(d); d->i = b; is that noexcept? Or is that a precondition? What happens if I delete the Q_ASSERT? Obviously they aren't necessary, because they already do disappear on release mode. On Windows, crashes are delivered as Structured Exceptions, which someone could convert in to C++ exceptions. So is any function that dereferences a pointer using a narrow contract? -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Principal Engineer - Intel DCAI Platform & System Engineering
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
-- Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
