Re: [eigen] exception specifications...

[Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx>]

I don't insist on anything: i don't know much about that, you're teaching me :)

Benoit

2010/4/17 Hauke Heibel <hauke.heibel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> I wanted to bring up this discussion once more in order to finish it... ;)
>
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 4:10 AM, leon zadorin <leonleon77@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 3/14/10, Hauke Heibel <hauke.heibel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> I thought it might be a good idea to remove the throw() declarations
>>
>> For as long as you retain your lib as 'header-only' one (i.e. no
>> shared lib files) -- with using extern/global functions et al, the
>> explicit "throw()" qualifier allows some compilers to optimize things
>> that they otherwise would/could not...
>>
>> For instance, from:
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.1/changes.html
>> we have:
>> "
>> When generating code for a shared library, GCC now recognizes that
>> global functions may be replaced when the program runs. Therefore, it
>> is now more conservative in deducing information from the bodies of
>> functions. For example, in this example:
>>
>>    void f() {}
>>    void g() {
>>     try { f(); }
>>     catch (...) {
>>       cout << "Exception";
>>     }
>>    }
>>
>> G++ would previously have optimized away the catch clause, since it
>> would have concluded that f cannot throw exceptions. Because users may
>> replace f with another function in the main body of the program, this
>> optimization is unsafe, and is no longer performed. If you wish G++ to
>> continue to optimize as before, you must add a throw() clause to the
>> declaration of f to make clear that it does not throw exceptions.
>> "
>
> So, does it mean we want to keep stuff or should we follow the advices
> given by the boost devs and/or H. Sutter!?
>
> In case you insist of sticking to throw(), I can finally remove the
> code I have in my repository.
>
> - Hauke
>
>
>