Re:Debugging memory corruption: who the hell writes "2" into...
by ch33zer on Tuesday December 31, 2024 @07:42PM
(#42563017)
This would actually be a nice change (but probably very breaking) for c interfaces called from a c++ context to be implicitly noexcept.
Re:Debugging memory corruption: who the hell writes "2" into...
by ryao on Wednesday January 01, 2025 @04:18AM
(#42564930)
It is a C interface. It is implicitly noexcept. I filed bugs against both GCC and LLVM requesting warnings when someone passes a non-noexcept C++ function pointer to either a C function or to a C++ noexcept function:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118263
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/121427
Perhaps the C++ standards committee should specify that doing this should cause a compiler failure, rather than a warning.
Re:Debugging memory corruption: who the hell writes "2" into...
by cryptonector on Wednesday January 01, 2025 @11:56AM
(#42567256)
Thanks for checking, clarifying, and filing those bugs!
It would also help if the APC docs documented that APCs must not throw.