Exception specifications on functions useless?

Stephan Bergmann sbergman at redhat.com
Wed Mar 21 04:02:48 PDT 2012

On 03/21/2012 11:37 AM, Michael Stahl wrote:
> for the case where it is a good idea to check exceptions (e.g. Java UNO
> bridge, which cannot throw exceptions to the Java side that are not
> declared on the interface), a runtime catch-all check should be
> sufficient also.

Yep, guards to catch attempts of throwing anything not allowed by UNO 
across a bridge are generally in place.

> but i wonder if there is any compatibility concern here; i'd be more
> comfortable if we only removed the exceptions specifications for LO4 and
> not earlier.

Removing exception specifications from the C++ headers generated by 
cppumaker and from C++ classes defined in the URE interface should 
actually be compatible.


More information about the LibreOffice mailing list