3 ms·
Yeah. That's why I don't say it's a failure condition for a stack-allocated object to overflow the stack. Notice my parent comment said: > Constructors are res
by PeCaN 10y ago
Yeah. That's why I don't say it's a failure condition for a stack-allocated object to overflow the stack. Notice my parent comment said:
> Constructors are resource allocation, so they can always fail.
Which is false.
- robotresearcher 10y agoCan you explain why this is false? If I run out of stack or heap by exceeding the process limit, the constructor must fail. Is this incorrect? I see your comment above that stack overflows essentially never happen, but having watched it happen, I disagree.
- ori_b 10y agoThis is not an error that you can reasonably recover from. If you are out of stack, even constructing an exception to throw is likely to fail. Because the only correct behavior here is to terminate the program immediately, it doesn't matter in the discussion of whether to use exceptions or not.