stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martin Sebor <>
Subject Re: svn commit: r777603 - in /stdcxx/branches/4.2.x: etc/config/src/ src/
Date Mon, 25 May 2009 16:26:19 GMT
Farid Zaripov wrote:
>> Why do we need this and the other tests?
>   I've got the MSVC 10.0 beta recently and I prepairing the stdcxx
> for this compiler. 
>> I'm pretty sure you know this but just for completeness:
> [...]
>> If there is a compiler that we need _RWSTD_NO_DOMAIN_ERROR_DTOR for,
>> won't we also need a macro for every single one of the rest of C++
>> Standard Library polymorphic classes such as std::ios_base?
>   Actually, the MSVC 10.0 beta libc contains dtor's for std::length_error
> and std::logic_error only (at least in 15s configuration which I've tested).
> It is still beta for now, but I believe that these dtors will go to the
> release.
>   Or should I fill the bug report to Microsoft on that issue?

That would be great, thanks! With dtors for arbitrary C++ Standard
Library in their libc there's no way to build/use a third party
implementation such as stdcxx. Imagine one of the dtors doing
something to the class, e.g.:

     class length_error: runtime_error {   // MSVC 10 definition
         char* data;
         virtual ~length_error () { delete[] data; }
         // ...


> Best Regards,
> Farid Zaripov

View raw message