This code seems to compile fine in MSVC ver 6, although I think it
should produce an error.

//...includes...

void f(void) throw(int);     //Can throw int exceptions
void (*pf1)(void) throw(); //Can't throw exceptions at all

void main(void)
{
     pf1 = &f;    //Should give compile time error because pf1
                       //is more restrictive than f() is?

     pf1();         //Works fine in MSVC ver 6(with the updates)
}

void f(void)throw(int)
{
     cout << "f() called\n" ;
     throw(9);
}

Any info regarding the code would be appreciated.

Philip Tarpley

---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu    ]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.research.att.com/~austern/csc/faq.html                ]
[ Note that the FAQ URL has changed!  Please update your bookmarks.     ]

"Philip Tarpley" <ptarp@wworld.com> wrote in message
news:3A19B14B.D2363CF0@wworld.com...
> This code seems to compile fine in MSVC ver 6, although I think it
> should produce an error.
>
> file://...includes...
>
> void f(void) throw(int);     file://Can throw int exceptions
> void (*pf1)(void) throw(); file://Can't throw exceptions at all

This would give a warning (at level 4?) saying something along the lines of
'exception specifications not supported, so yah boo sucks'.

> void main(void)

#include <stdmoan> // return type is int

> {
>      pf1 = &f;    file://Should give compile time error because pf1
>                        file://is more restrictive than f() is?
>
>      pf1();         file://Works fine in MSVC ver 6(with the updates)
> }

According to 15.4/3, your rationale is right. But MSVC ignores exception
specs.

Ric


---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu    ]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.research.att.com/~austern/csc/faq.html                ]
[ Note that the FAQ URL has changed!  Please update your bookmarks.     ]

In article <3A19B14B.D2363CF0@wworld.com>, Philip Tarpley
<ptarp@wworld.com> writes
>This code seems to compile fine in MSVC ver 6, although I think it
>should produce an error.
>
>//...includes...
>
>void f(void) throw(int);     //Can throw int exceptions
>void (*pf1)(void) throw(); //Can't throw exceptions at all
>
>void main(void)
 ^^^^
But, if it were an attempt to meet the C++ standard it would produce a
diagnostic for the void return from main.
>{
>     pf1 = &f;    //Should give compile time error because pf1
>                       //is more restrictive than f() is?

As it has already ignored the standard once, why expect it to be more
punctilious here?

>
>     pf1();         //Works fine in MSVC ver 6(with the updates)
>}

Francis Glassborow      Association of C & C++ Users
64 Southfield Rd
Oxford OX4 1PA          +44(0)1865 246490
All opinions are mine and do not represent those of any organisation

---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu    ]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.research.att.com/~austern/csc/faq.html                ]
[ Note that the FAQ URL has changed!  Please update your bookmarks.     ]

Richard Parkin wrote:
>
> According to 15.4/3, your rationale is right. But MSVC ignores exception
> specs.
>

15.4/3 is about virtual functions. There are no virtual functions here.

--
Pete Becker
Dinkumware, Ltd. (http://www.dinkumware.com)
Contributing Editor, C/C++ Users Journal (http://www.cuj.com)

---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu    ]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.research.att.com/~austern/csc/faq.html                ]
[ Note that the FAQ URL has changed!  Please update your bookmarks.     ]

Pete Becker wrote:
>
> Richard Parkin wrote:
> >
> > According to 15.4/3, your rationale is right. But MSVC ignores exception
> > specs.
> >
>
> 15.4/3 is about virtual functions. There are no virtual functions here.
>

Whoops, never mind. 15.4/3 talks about two different subjects.

--
Pete Becker
Dinkumware, Ltd. (http://www.dinkumware.com)
Contributing Editor, C/C++ Users Journal (http://www.cuj.com)

---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu    ]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.research.att.com/~austern/csc/faq.html                ]
[ Note that the FAQ URL has changed!  Please update your bookmarks.     ]