Re: We have a new standard!

Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org writes:

On Fri, 03 Jan 2025 10:50:51 -0500
Sam <sam@email-scan.com> wibbled:

Paavo Helde writes:
Here's a free clue. Define "function X throws exception Y" if it throws that
exception (and it doesn't catch it itself), or if it calls function Z that's
declared (in Z's throw specifier) as throwing that exception. The compiler
has all the information needed to know which exception can be thrown out of
that function.
>
This is not C. This is C++. The compiler has the signature of every function
called by code.

>
It needs more than that when function pointers are involved. It cannot

Do you happen to recall how a function pointer indicates that it's pointing  to a noexcept function, by any chance?
Newflash: this already exists in C++. But instead of noexcept you put down  the throw specification, and it works the same way.

necessarily know at compile time which function will be assigned to the
pointer so how is it supposed to know if the exception sig is valid?

The same way the compiler already prohibits you from assigning a pointer to  a throwing function to a pointer to a noexcept function.
Am I the only one around here who doesn't see this as rocket science?
=========================================================================
int (*noexcept_func)() noexcept;
int (*except_func)();
void foo()
{
except_func=noexcept_func; // OK
noexcept_func=except_func; // Error
}
=========================================================================
A full throw specifier can also be validated for correctness, in the same  exact FUCKING way, at compile time. This would look like…
=========================================================================
int (*noexcept_func)() throw(ExceptionA);
int (*except_func)() throw(ExceptionA, ExceptionB);
void foo()
{
except_func=noexcept_func; // OK
noexcept_func=except_func; // Error
}
=========================================================================
Sheesh, dark magic, isn't it?
(add a few more rules dealing how subclasses and superclasses are compared,  in the throw specifier, for completeness)

Unless
you're suggesting also have an exception sig for function pointers which  would
probably break a whole load of code and make life difficult for zero gain.

Not any more than existing code had to be rewritten when throw exceptions  were removed leaving behind just noexcept.
For all that talk about not breaking existing code, it sure got broken many  times, in C++'s history. If someone with a brain actually does a Picard, and  makes it so, backwards compatibility won't be much of a concern.