You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
A handler is considered active when initialization is complete for the parameter (if any) of the catch clause. Also, an implicit handler is considered active when the function std::terminate is entered due to a throw.
Since the implicit handler can be considered active, it should also be considered as a matching handler. Simultaneously, [except.handle] p9 sates
If no matching handler is found, the function std::terminate is invoked;
Then, whether the implicit handle can be found? this issue is caused by that [except.handle] p7 and [except.handle] p9 have a cross-dependence. I think we should improve [except.handle] p9 to eliminate the dependence:
If no matching handler other than the implicit handler is found, the function std::terminate is invoked;
which means, the "the matching handler" case only considers the lexcially handlers.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
[except.handle] p7 says
Since the implicit handler can be considered active, it should also be considered as a matching handler. Simultaneously, [except.handle] p9 sates
Then, whether the implicit handle can be found? this issue is caused by that [except.handle] p7 and [except.handle] p9 have a cross-dependence. I think we should improve [except.handle] p9 to eliminate the dependence:
which means, the "the matching handler" case only considers the lexcially handlers.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: