From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 19 Oct 92 07:31:14 GMT
From: mcsun!sunic!lth.se!newsuser@uunet.uu.net  (Dag Bruck)
Subject: Re: User-defined assignment
Message-ID: <1992Oct19.073114.289@lth.se>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In <comp.lang.ada> stt@spock.camb.inmet.com (Tucker Taft) writes:
>
>Array initializations are problem the worst, since these generally
>occur in a loop, and so the finalization would to be done
>for only those elements for which initialiation succeeded, requiring
>that the exception handler have a loop that depended on the state
>of the initialization loop at the time of the exception.

Arrays are built-in types in C++, so the initialization routine for
and array of Foo is part of the runtime library (typically).  Any
special handling to cope with partial construction is thus restricted
to this single vendor-supplied library routine.

An array library in C++, for example a library that provides index
range checking, would have to be carefully written to preserve the
desired behaviour in presence of exceptions.


		-- Dag