You're right, I wasn't thinking, if an exception isn't caught before it
leaves main it aborts the program.
So maybe codewarrior has a bug!
Mike
On Tue, 2002-04-23 at 06:33, Lassi A. Tuura wrote:
> > That shouldn't matter. At the worst it should mean that the exception is not
> > caught by any
> That shouldn't matter. At the worst it should mean that the exception is not
> caught by any of the catch clauses given, so the "return 0" would be taken.
It does matter -- in this case the exception was not handled, and
therefore terminate() gets called, which probably called abort(). That
i
> -Original Message-
> From: Michael D. Crawford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 6:24 PM
>
> Usually throwing a pointer is not what you really want to do,
> but it shouldn't
> cause a crash.
Is it worth putting this up as a bug on the gcc bugs database?
R
> You threw const char*
That shouldn't matter. At the worst it should mean that the exception is not
caught by any of the catch clauses given, so the "return 0" would be taken.
The only thing that should happen to an exception object after you're done with
it is that objects thrown by value
It aborts with g++ 2.95.4 on Debian PowerPC Linux too.
But if I compile it with CodeWarrior 6 on Windows it runs normally, doesn't
crash, and gives the exit code of 1.
I think CodeWarrior is correct, and that this is a bug in g++, but not in cygwin.
Mike
Thus it was written:
I don't know if t
> -Original Message-
> From: Danny Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 6:11 PM
>
> Robert wrote:
> >
> > I don't know if this is a cygwin issue or if I am doing something
> > fundamentally wrong...
> >
>
> You threw const char*
Sigh. Blush. I should have
Robert wrote:
>
> I don't know if this is a cygwin issue or if I am doing something
> fundamentally wrong...
>
You threw const char*
int
main (int argc, char **argv)
{
try
{
throw "catch this";
}
catch (const char *message)
// ^
{
return 1;
}
return
7 matches
Mail list logo
