Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #69753 > unrolled thread

Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated?

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c++

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2019-11-15 06:36 -0500
    Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-11-15 13:37 +0100
      Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-11-15 17:17 +0100
        Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2019-11-15 11:51 -0500
          Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-11-15 18:56 +0100
            Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2019-11-15 17:18 -0500
              Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-11-16 09:05 +0100
                Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2019-11-16 14:32 -0500
                  Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-11-16 20:49 +0100
                    Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2019-11-16 20:08 -0500
                      Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Mr Flibble <flibbleREMOVETHISBIT@i42.co.uk> - 2019-11-17 01:10 +0000
                        Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-11-17 14:31 +1300
                      Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-11-17 09:18 +0100
                        Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2019-11-17 07:59 -0500
                          Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-11-17 16:06 +0100
                            Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2019-11-17 16:27 -0500
                              Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-11-18 16:29 +1300
                              Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-11-18 07:01 +0100
                                Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2019-11-18 10:16 -0500
                                  Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-11-18 16:48 +0100
                                    Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2019-11-18 11:33 -0500
                                      Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-11-18 17:41 +0100
                                        Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2019-11-18 11:58 -0500
                                          Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-11-18 18:15 +0100
                                            Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2019-11-18 12:22 -0500
                                              Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-11-18 10:05 -0800
                                                Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2019-11-18 18:21 -0500
                                                  Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-11-19 08:26 +0100
                                                    Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2019-11-19 06:38 -0500
                                                  Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-11-19 10:29 -0800
                                                  Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-11-22 11:08 -0500
                                                    Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2019-11-22 20:49 -0500
      Re: Where are the exception-objects allocated? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2019-11-15 11:14 -0500

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#69889

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Bonita Montero writes:

>> Oh, so you only have professional qualifications for evaluating if someone's  
>> a complete idiot? That's good enough. Let's see them, please. Or, in the  
>> alternate, what is your membership number in the American Society of  
>> Standards in Working Idiocy Professional Evaluators; and
>> I'll  just look your membership on their web site.
>
> Everyone with an average knowledge of human nature has this, except you.

Do you consider yourself as having "average knowledge"? If so, then you must  
be a member of a professional organization, according to your own words.

I never claimed to be a professional member of any such organization in this  
thread. You demanded that I must be one, in order to diagnose your case of  
projection, and I did not dispute that I never claimed to be one.

I still don't quite understand your reluctance to show your proof of  
membership in the American Society of Standards in Working Idiocy  
Professional Evaluators. Are you or are you not a member? By your own rules,  
you must be one, in order to call someone either an idiot, or a complete  
idiot (still not sure about that one).

Or, maybe you just expect me to take your word for it?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69890

> I never claimed to be a professional member of any such organization in 
> this thread. You demanded that I must be one, in order to diagnose your 
> case of projection, and I did not dispute that I never claimed to be one.

In Germany we call diagnoses like yours as "kitchen psychology" which
could be translated ad layman's psychology. And those diagnoses are
not even inprecise, but usually nonsense.
You're simply a stupid person.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69891

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Bonita Montero writes:

>> I never claimed to be a professional member of any such organization in
>> this thread. You demanded that I must be one, in order to diagnose your
>> case of projection, and I did not dispute that I never claimed to be one.

[ important context restored ]

>> I still don't quite understand your reluctance to show your proof of
>> membership in the American Society of Standards in Working Idiocy
>> Professional Evaluators. Are you or are you not a member? By your own
>> rules, you must be one, in order to call someone either an idiot, or
>> a complete idiot (still not sure about that one).
>
> In Germany we call diagnoses like yours as "kitchen psychology" which
> could be translated ad layman's psychology. And those diagnoses are
> not even inprecise, but usually nonsense.
> You're simply a stupid person.

It does seem, for whatever reason, you're trying to deny your A.S.S.W.I.P.E.  
membership. Why would you do this? You should be proud for being a card- 
carrying A.S.S.W.I.P.E. It's a major accomplishment, that few achieve in  
their lifetime.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69892

> It does seem, for whatever reason, you're trying to deny your 
> A.S.S.W.I.P.E. membership. Why would you do this? You should be proud 
> for being a card-carrying A.S.S.W.I.P.E. It's a major accomplishment, 
> that few achieve in their lifetime.

Youre a stupid, immature troll.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69893

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Bonita Montero writes:

>> It does seem, for whatever reason, you're trying to deny your A.S.S.W.I.P.E.  
>> membership. Why would you do this? You should be proud for being a card- 
>> carrying A.S.S.W.I.P.E. It's a major accomplishment, that few achieve in  
>> their lifetime.
>
> Youre a stupid, immature troll.

Would someone need professional credentials, to make that kind of diagnosis?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69895

Sam <sam@email-scan.com> writes:
> Bonita Montero writes:
>>> It does seem, for whatever reason, you're trying to deny your A.S.S.W.I.P.E.  
>>> membership. Why would you do this? You should be proud for being a card- 
>>> carrying A.S.S.W.I.P.E. It's a major accomplishment, that few achieve in  
>>> their lifetime.
>>
>> Youre a stupid, immature troll.
>
> Would someone need professional credentials, to make that kind of diagnosis?

Sam, please stop feeding the troll.  I wouldn't see Bonita's posts
if you didn't quote them.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for Philips Healthcare
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69898

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Keith Thompson writes:

> Sam, please stop feeding the troll.  I wouldn't see Bonita's posts
> if you didn't quote them.

I do not go out of my way to respond (or not respond) to anyone, in  
particular. That, I can state affirmatively. I will not set up a filter, and  
flame away at that low-information poster's every outburst.

But, if I happen to stumble across something response-worthy and I choose to  
respond, then I will. Especially if the resulting back-and-forth promises to  
be quite entertaining. And if seeing someone else's writings indirectly  
irritates someone else, as a result, this is unfortunate; but they are free  
to make their own decisions (and also threaten to ban me from offending  
their delicate eyeballs, as well, if it makes them feel better).

But I will not refrain from enjoying a cost-free source of cheap  
entertainment just because someone else gets upset. It just makes no logical  
sense for me to do so.

If someone gets so discombobulated by mere words – and nothing more than  
words on the screen – then I truly feel some pity for them. Personally, I  
choose to deal with the world at large as it is, both good and bad. I'll  
happily give the job of getting triggered by mean words to all the millenial  
snowflakes.

P.S. That's a "troll"? Really? Gosh, our standards have sunk by quite a bit.  
That entity can't even come up to the ankles of any of the legendary trolls  
of yesteryear. Examples provided upon request.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69901

On 19/11/2019 00:21, Sam wrote:

> But I will not refrain from enjoying a cost-free source of cheap 
> entertainment just because someone else gets upset. It just makes no 
> logical sense for me to do so.
> 

I appreciate your right to post the way you want here, and I fully 
appreciate your motive of cheap entertainment.  But there comes a point 
in which such threads become more akin to Calvin and Hobbes "You're a 
potty mouth!  No, /you're/ a potty mouth!".  Surely that can no longer 
be entertaining?

Bonita does not seem to be going anywhere - you'll get plenty of new 
chances in the future, and perhaps an opportunity for new and more 
varied insults.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69902

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

David Brown writes:

> Bonita does not seem to be going anywhere - you'll get plenty of new chances  
> in the future, and perhaps an opportunity for new and more varied insults.

Sounds like a plan, to me.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69904

Sam <sam@email-scan.com> writes:
[..]
> Keith Thompson writes:
>
>> Sam, please stop feeding the troll.  I wouldn't see Bonita's posts
>> if you didn't quote them.
>
> I do not go out of my way to respond (or not respond) to anyone,
> in particular. That, I can state affirmatively. I will not set
> up a filter, and flame away at that low-information poster's
> every outburst.
>
> But, if I happen to stumble across something response-worthy and
> I choose to respond, then I will. Especially if the resulting
> back-and-forth promises to be quite entertaining. And if seeing
> someone else's writings indirectly irritates someone else, as
> a result, this is unfortunate; but they are free to make their
> own decisions (and also threaten to ban me from offending their
> delicate eyeballs, as well, if it makes them feel better).

The purpose of this newsgroup is to discuss C++.  I don't recall
seeing you do so here.  If your personal entertainment is more
important than sticking to the topic of the newsgroup, I can get
along without seeing any of your contributions, so I'll add you to
my killfile as well.

I find it rude that you impose on the other readers of this
newsgroup the burden of either adjusting their filters or reading
your off-topic and frankly boring "entertainment".  I encourage
you to stop, but it will no longer matter to me personally.

Bye.

[...]

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for Philips Healthcare
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69993

On 11/18/19 6:21 PM, Sam wrote:
...
> But, if I happen to stumble across something response-worthy and I choose to  
> respond, then I will. Especially if the resulting back-and-forth promises to  
> be quite entertaining. ...

To me, it's just annoying, not entertaining.

> ... And if seeing someone else's writings indirectly  
> irritates someone else, as a result, this is unfortunate; but they are free  
> to make their own decisions (and also threaten to ban me from offending  
> their delicate eyeballs, as well, if it makes them feel better).

I won't threaten to ban you. I'll either do it, or not do it, and if I
do decide to do it, I won't bother announcing that fact, either. I don't
expect people to be afraid of being in my killfile, so I don't see that
I have any leverage for changing their behavior by threatening to put
them there.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70004

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

James Kuyper writes:

> On 11/18/19 6:21 PM, Sam wrote:
> ...
> > But, if I happen to stumble across something response-worthy and I choose  
> to
> > respond, then I will. Especially if the resulting back-and-forth promises  
> to
> > be quite entertaining. ...
>
> To me, it's just annoying, not entertaining.

There are, I suppose, some things around here that I might also find  
annoying.

But I can't quite figure out why I need to announce this. I'm under no  
illusion that anyone cares whether I find something annoying, or not. So,  
what's the purpose in making this kind of an announcement? I don't get it. I  
find something interesting or entertaining, I respond. If not, I just move  
on.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69762

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Bonita Montero writes:

>> Feel free to download the source code to gcc and libstdc++, and see for  
>> yourself.
>
> Read the complete thread before you post!

Unfortunately, I did.

> I already found this (https://libcxxabi.llvm.org/spec.html):
>
> | void* __cxa_allocate_exception(size_t thrown_size) throw();
> | Effects: Allocates memory to hold the exception to be thrown.
> | thrown_size is the size of the exception object. Can allocate
> | additional memory to hold private data. If memory can not be
> | allocated, call std::terminate().
> | Returns: A pointer to the memory allocated for the exception object.
>
> This looks to me the usual and pragmatical way it is done.

Excellent. Now, aren't you curious how this "__cxa_allocate_exception" does  
about its business? And after you figure that out, I'm sure you'll be  
curious enough to know the precise semantics down to the transistor level.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c++

csiph-web