dsimcha wrote:
The problem is that, at least according to my testing, this has significant
overhead, to the point where you may as well just not make A nothrow, from a
performance perspective. Basically, what I'm asking is, if the compiler knew
that
you weren't going to try to recover from a bException, could it do better than
catch { abort(); }?
Try casting B to be a nothrow function.
