https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14493
--- Comment #33 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c73f20e67ee8d268bf0dfd6732c1bd3e79e098ca
commit r10-11323-gc73f20e67ee8d268bf0dfd6732c1bd3e79e098ca
Author: Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14493
--- Comment #32 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ee1a8294754af16b00538b17414679c8d72a575b
commit r11-10660-gee1a8294754af16b00538b17414679c8d72a575b
Author: Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14493
--- Comment #31 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e016a6ddbf0038056b9d8f2bc0bad350ff026632
commit r12-9456-ge016a6ddbf0038056b9d8f2bc0bad350ff026632
Author: Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14493
--- Comment #30 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:688d126b69215db29774c249b052e52d765782b3
commit r13-6999-g688d126b69215db29774c249b052e52d765782b3
Author: Jonathan Wakely
--- Comment #27 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-01 13:37 ---
Subject: Bug 14493
Author: paolo
Date: Thu Feb 1 13:36:51 2007
New Revision: 121461
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=121461
Log:
2007-02-01 Paolo Carlini [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.2.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14493
--- Comment #28 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-01 15:56 ---
Subject: Bug 14493
Author: paolo
Date: Thu Feb 1 15:56:37 2007
New Revision: 121465
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=121465
Log:
2007-02-01 Paolo Carlini [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #29 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-02-01 15:58 ---
Fixed.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #26 from lopresti at gmail dot com 2007-02-01 02:17 ---
I found this PR because I tried calling what() on a bad_alloc, was surprised by
what I got, and did a search. This is my perspective as a random end user;
make of it what you will.
I think std::bad_alloc is an
--- Comment #18 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-01-30 00:34 ---
Implementing the really trivial solution of providing what() members returning
std::bad_alloc, std::bad_cast, std::bad_typeid, and std::bad_exception.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #19 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-30 00:54
---
(In reply to comment #18)
Implementing the really trivial solution of providing what() members returning
std::bad_alloc, std::bad_cast, std::bad_typeid, and
std::bad_exception.
I don't think that is the
--- Comment #20 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-01-30 00:58 ---
(In reply to comment #19)
I don't think that is the correct solution as if you subclass these functions,
you get the incorrect result.
What do you mean by incorrect?!? If you subclass, either you provide your own
--- Comment #21 from gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu 2007-01-30 01:30 ---
Subject: Re: std::bad_alloc::what() does not explain what happened
pcarlini at suse dot de [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| What do you mean by incorrect?!? If you subclass, either you
| provide your own what(), or you
--- Comment #22 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-01-30 01:42 ---
(In reply to comment #21)
I suspect Andrew Pinski's point might be that what() could return a
string that represents the name of the most derived type of the
exception. But, nothing so far forces to do that. A
--- Comment #23 from gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu 2007-01-30 02:11 ---
Subject: Re: std::bad_alloc::what() does not explain what happened
pcarlini at suse dot de [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| --- Comment #22 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-01-30 01:42 ---
| (In reply to
--- Comment #24 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-01-30 02:21 ---
(In reply to comment #23)
From consistency point of view I would say that the change should also
be done for std::exception.
Right.
However, the use of typeid is very convenient in the sense that we
have to
--- Comment #25 from gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu 2007-01-30 03:53 ---
Subject: Re: std::bad_alloc::what() does not explain what happened
pcarlini at suse dot de [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| However, the use of typeid is very convenient in the sense that we
| have to defined what()
17 matches
Mail list logo
