Hi!

I was handling a g++ bug report today and I found the following
(simplified) situation:

struct bar { ~bar() { throw 1; };
class baz {};

baz foo(bar b) { return baz(); }

main() {
  foo(bar());
}

The user complained that the baz temporary created as return value of
foo was not being destructed because bar's destructor threw an
exception.  I seem to agree it would be quite reasonable to have this
temporary's destructor invoked, but I could not find any such
requirement in the CD2.  Can anyone help?

Besides, I could not find any requirement regarding the order of
destruction of function argument temporaries: I assume the standard
rule of destruction in reverse order of construction stands then, am I
right?

Regards,

--
Alexandre Oliva
mailto:oliva@dcc.unicamp.br mailto:aoliva@acm.org
Universidade Estadual de Campinas, SP, Brasil
---
[ 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         ]
[ FAQ:      http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html    ]
[ Policy:   http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/policy.html ]
[ Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu                             ]