Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #30221
| From | Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c++ |
| Subject | Re: The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look |
| Date | 2014-08-05 06:57 +0000 |
| Organization | Netfront http://www.netfront.net/ |
| Message-ID | <lrpv7r$4d9$1@adenine.netfront.net> (permalink) |
| References | (6 earlier) <20140724232902.5f67e127@bother.homenet> <20140724234541.50c1b0c1@bother.homenet> <uutAv.140204$L6.7454@fx08.iad> <lrn7ft$vsh$2@adenine.netfront.net> <I6NDv.173094$DV4.53284@fx05.iad> |
Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote: >>> I still use sigsetjmp/siglongjmp in C++ applications when useful. >> >>Sure, if you want to bypass destructors... > > Obviously. Duh, that's something anyone who chooses to use setjmp/longjmp > needs to be aware of. > > The applications which use sigsetjmp/siglongjmp tend to create long-lived > objects using new and delete, and control the allocation and deallocation > carefully. How about not using those functions at all? The vast majority of people manage just fine without them. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---
Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look "K. Frank" <kfrank29.c@gmail.com> - 2014-07-16 08:06 -0700
Re: The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2014-07-16 16:12 -0700
Re: The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look "K. Frank" <kfrank29.c@gmail.com> - 2014-07-18 09:39 -0700
Re: The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2014-07-19 03:48 -0700
Re: The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2014-07-24 05:36 +0000
Re: The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2014-07-24 10:08 -0500
Re: The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look Bo Persson <bop@gmb.dk> - 2014-07-24 18:00 +0200
Re: The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk> - 2014-07-24 17:36 +0100
Re: The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2014-07-24 12:28 -0500
Re: The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look Dombo <dombo@disposable.invalid> - 2014-07-24 23:50 +0200
Re: The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2014-07-25 05:36 +0000
Re: The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2014-07-25 18:18 +0000
Re: The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk> - 2014-07-24 23:29 +0100
Re: The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk> - 2014-07-24 23:45 +0100
Re: The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2014-07-25 14:05 +0000
Re: The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2014-08-04 05:59 +0000
Re: The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2014-08-04 14:52 +0000
Re: The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2014-08-05 06:57 +0000
Re: The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2014-08-05 05:53 -0700
Re: The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look Martijn Lievaart <m@rtij.nl.invlalid> - 2014-08-05 16:20 +0200
Re: The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2014-08-05 16:58 -0700
Re: The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2014-08-07 11:04 +0000
Re: The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2014-08-05 14:27 +0000
Re: The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2014-08-07 11:06 +0000
Re: The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2014-07-28 21:01 +0200
Re: The (anti) C++ FQA Lite -- worth a look Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2014-08-03 16:22 -0700
csiph-web