stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Martin Sebor (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] Updated: (STDCXX-209) make std::bad_alloc::what() more informative
Date Sun, 26 Aug 2007 21:11:30 GMT


Martin Sebor updated STDCXX-209:

    Affects Version/s: 4.1.4
        Fix Version/s: 4.3

Added 4.1.4 to affected versions and scheduled for 4.3.

> make std::bad_alloc::what() more informative
> --------------------------------------------
>                 Key: STDCXX-209
>                 URL:
>             Project: C++ Standard Library
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: 18. Language Support
>    Affects Versions: 4.1.2, 4.1.3, 4.1.4
>         Environment: all
>            Reporter: Martin Sebor
>             Fix For: 4.3
> Moved from the Rogue Wave bug tracking database:
> ****Created By: hoaglin @ Sep 17, 2004 07:46:13 PM****
> **** Entered By: Web @ Thursday, September 09, 2004 8:01:23 AM **** 
> #web
> Keith,
> I'm not doing garbage collection and I'm not looking for any change in the memory management.
 All I want is that when the new operator throws an exception it sticks the # of bytes of
memory requested in the exception handler what() message. Surely this information is readily
available where the exception is being thrown and I don't see why this should cause any overhead
so long as no exception is being thrown,
> ****Modified By: sebor @ Apr 11, 2005 02:58:41 PM****
> This would be useful but std::bad_alloc is thrown by the operator new defined by the
runtime library that comes with the compiler. We have little control over what string the
what() member function returns. We could wrap calls made by our library in another function,
catch the bad_alloc there, and rethrow another exception derived from std::bad_alloc, where
we could override what() and format the string so as to include the information the user is
asking for but that would only take care of exceptions thrown as a result of running out of
memory within the library itself and not user code. A better solution would be to send this
request to compiler vendors.
> Deferred.

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

View raw message