Basic question C++ exception
 

Hi All,

I am not able to figure out what exactly happening in below code. what
is control flow. Can anyone clear my confusion?

Code:
class A
{
public:
A(){cout<<"In Constructor\n";}
//// A(const A&){cout<<"In Copy Constructor\n";} // if we uncomment
this, we see different //output .
~A(){cout<<"In Destructor\n";}
};
try{
cout<<"In Try\n";
throw A();
}
catch(A &a)
{
cout<<"In Catch\n";
}
output:
In Try;
In Constructor
In Destructor
In Catch
In Destructor

Question 1. I don't know why two times destructor has been called. I
understand, since i am using reference, so there would not be any new
object. then why two times destructor got called.

Question 2.

class A
{
public:
A(){cout<<"In Constructor\n";}
A(const A&){cout<<"In Copy Constructor\n";}
~A(){cout<<"In Destructor\n";}
};
try{
cout<<"In Try\n";
throw A();
}
catch(A a)
{
cout<<"In Catch\n";
}
output:
In Try;
In Constructor
In Copy Constructor
In Catch
In Destructor
In Destructor

Why object created by throw A() has not been deleted while exiting try
block in above code?

thanks in advance.

Regards,

Re: Basic question C++ exception
 

On 2008-06-29 17:34, Vijay wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I am not able to figure out what exactly happening in below code. what
> is control flow. Can anyone clear my confusion?
>
> Code:
> class A
> {
> public:
> A(){cout<<"In Constructor\n";}
> //// A(const A&){cout<<"In Copy Constructor\n";} // if we uncomment
> this, we see different //output .
> ~A(){cout<<"In Destructor\n";}
> };
> try{
> cout<<"In Try\n";
> throw A();
> }
> catch(A &a)
> {
> cout<<"In Catch\n";
> }
> output:
> In Try;
> In Constructor
> In Destructor
> In Catch
> In Destructor
>
> Question 1. I don't know why two times destructor has been called. I
> understand, since i am using reference, so there would not be any new
> object. then why two times destructor got called.

The throw-expression creates a temporary object (the exception object)
using the copy-constructor and that is the one destroyed after the
handler has run. The compiler is however allowed to optimise away the
extra object, what is funny is that my compiler chooses to do so only
when I uncomment the copy-constructor.

> Question 2.
>
> class A
> {
> public:
> A(){cout<<"In Constructor\n";}
> A(const A&){cout<<"In Copy Constructor\n";}
> ~A(){cout<<"In Destructor\n";}
> };
> try{
> cout<<"In Try\n";
> throw A();
> }
> catch(A a)
> {
> cout<<"In Catch\n";
> }
> output:
> In Try;
> In Constructor
> In Copy Constructor
> In Catch
> In Destructor
> In Destructor
>
> Why object created by throw A() has not been deleted while exiting try
> block in above code?

The object created by thow can not be destroyes before it has been used
to initialise the object in the exception-handler (the extra copy has
been eliminated). It will also live until the last exception handler has
run (if the object is destroyed and you re-throw what would happen
then?), so it is the last destructor to run.

If I comment out the copy-constructor my compiler does not optimise away
the extra copy and I get the following result:

In Try
In Constructor // throw A(), followed by a copy-constructor
In Destructor // The object created by A() is destroyed
In Catch // a in the catch(A a) is copy-constructed first
In Destructor // The object created in the handler is destroyes
In Destructor // The exception object dies

--
Erik Wikström

Re: Basic question C++ exception
 

On Jun 29, 11:34*am, Vijay <mt.vi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I am not able to figure out what exactly happening in below code. what
> is control flow. Can anyone clear my confusion?
>
> Code:
> class A
> {
> public:
> * * * * A(){cout<<"In Constructor\n";}
> //// * *A(const A&){cout<<"In Copy Constructor\n";} // if we uncomment
> this, we see different //output .
> * * * * *~A(){cout<<"In Destructor\n";}};
>
> try{
> * * * * cout<<"In Try\n";
> * * * * throw A();
> * * * * }
> catch(A &a)
> {
> * * * * cout<<"In Catch\n";}
>
> output:
> In Try;
> In Constructor
> In Destructor
> In Catch
> In Destructor
>
> Question 1. I don't know why two times destructor has been called. I
> understand, since i am using reference, so there would not be any new
> object. then why two times destructor got called.
>
> Question 2.
>
> class A
> {
> public:
> * * * * A(){cout<<"In Constructor\n";}
> * * * *A(const A&){cout<<"In Copy Constructor\n";}
> * * * * *~A(){cout<<"In Destructor\n";}};
>
> try{
> * * * * cout<<"In Try\n";
> * * * * throw A();
> * * * * }
> catch(A a)
> {
> * * * * cout<<"In Catch\n";}
>
> output:
> In Try;
> In Constructor
> In Copy Constructor
> In Catch
> In Destructor
> In Destructor
>
> Why object created by throw A() has not been deleted while exiting try
> block in above code?
>
> thanks in advance.
>
> Regards,

In the first case, there has to be copy since you are getting two
destructor
calls. The copy is done using the default copy constructor which
doesn't
print any output. Makes sense to me.

I'm not sure why the order of the destructors are different in the
second
example. Could it have anything to do with the fact that the code you
posted for the second example is catching the exception by value? Or
is the missing '&' a typo?

Re: Basic question C++ exception
 

On Jun 29, 12:41*pm, Erik Wikström <Erik-wikst...@telia.com> wrote:
> On 2008-06-29 17:34, Vijay wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hi All,
>
> > I am not able to figure out what exactly happening in below code. what
> > is control flow. Can anyone clear my confusion?
>
> > Code:
> > class A
> > {
> > public:
> > * *A(){cout<<"In Constructor\n";}
> > //// * * * A(const A&){cout<<"In Copy Constructor\n";} // if we uncomment
> > this, we see different //output .
> > * * ~A(){cout<<"In Destructor\n";}
> > };
> > try{
> > * *cout<<"In Try\n";
> > * *throw A();
> > * *}
> > catch(A &a)
> > {
> > * *cout<<"In Catch\n";
> > }
> > output:
> > In Try;
> > In Constructor
> > In Destructor
> > In Catch
> > In Destructor
>
> > Question 1. I don't know why two times destructor has been called. I
> > understand, since i am using reference, so there would not be any new
> > object. then why two times destructor got called.
>
> The throw-expression creates a temporary object (the exception object)
> using the copy-constructor and that is the one destroyed after the
> handler has run. The compiler is however allowed to optimise away the
> extra object, what is funny is that my compiler chooses to do so only
> when I uncomment the copy-constructor.

yes. even i was thinking same. but was confused why compiler shows
different behavior after uncommenting the copy constructor. Thanks for
you reply


>
> > Question 2.
>
> > class A
> > {
> > public:
> > * *A(){cout<<"In Constructor\n";}
> > * * * *A(const A&){cout<<"In Copy Constructor\n";}
> > * * ~A(){cout<<"In Destructor\n";}
> > };
> > try{
> > * *cout<<"In Try\n";
> > * *throw A();
> > * *}
> > catch(A a)
> > {
> > * *cout<<"In Catch\n";
> > }
> > output:
> > In Try;
> > In Constructor
> > In Copy Constructor
> > In Catch
> > In Destructor
> > In Destructor
>
> > Why object created by throw A() has not been deleted while exiting try
> > block in above code?
>
> The object created by thow can not be destroyes before it has been used
> to initialise the object in the exception-handler (the extra copy has
> been eliminated). It will also live until the last exception handler has
> run (if the object is destroyed and you re-throw what would happen
> then?), so it is the last destructor to run.
>
> If I comment out the copy-constructor my compiler does not optimise away
> the extra copy and I get the following result:
>
> In Try
> In Constructor * * // throw A(), followed by a copy-constructor
> In Destructor * * *// The object created by A() is destroyed
> In Catch * * * * * // a in the catch(A a) is copy-constructed first
> In Destructor * * *// The object created in the handler is destroyes
> In Destructor * * *// The exception object dies

Thanks. I think, because of compiler optimization, i am getting
confused.
one more point: in your above result, i didnt get two lines
In Destructor // The object created by A() is destroyed
and
In Destructor // The exception object dies

object created by A() is exception object. right?
If no, then when exception object is created which dies in last line?

Thanks a lot :)
>
> --
> Erik Wikström

Re: Basic question C++ exception
 

On Jun 29, 12:44*pm, "AnonMail2...@gmail.com" <AnonMail2...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Jun 29, 11:34*am, Vijay <mt.vi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hi All,
>
> > I am not able to figure out what exactly happening in below code. what
> > is control flow. Can anyone clear my confusion?
>
> > Code:
> > class A
> > {
> > public:
> > * * * * A(){cout<<"In Constructor\n";}
> > //// * *A(const A&){cout<<"In Copy Constructor\n";} // if we uncomment
> > this, we see different //output .
> > * * * * *~A(){cout<<"In Destructor\n";}};
>
> > try{
> > * * * * cout<<"In Try\n";
> > * * * * throw A();
> > * * * * }
> > catch(A &a)
> > {
> > * * * * cout<<"In Catch\n";}
>
> > output:
> > In Try;
> > In Constructor
> > In Destructor
> > In Catch
> > In Destructor
>
> > Question 1. I don't know why two times destructor has been called. I
> > understand, since i am using reference, so there would not be any new
> > object. then why two times destructor got called.
>
> > Question 2.
>
> > class A
> > {
> > public:
> > * * * * A(){cout<<"In Constructor\n";}
> > * * * *A(const A&){cout<<"In Copy Constructor\n";}
> > * * * * *~A(){cout<<"In Destructor\n";}};
>
> > try{
> > * * * * cout<<"In Try\n";
> > * * * * throw A();
> > * * * * }
> > catch(A a)
> > {
> > * * * * cout<<"In Catch\n";}
>
> > output:
> > In Try;
> > In Constructor
> > In Copy Constructor
> > In Catch
> > In Destructor
> > In Destructor
>
> > Why object created by throw A() has not been deleted while exiting try
> > block in above code?
>
> > thanks in advance.
>
> > Regards,
>
> In the first case, there has to be copy since you are getting two
> destructor
> calls. *The copy is done using the default copy constructor which
> doesn't
> print any output. *Makes sense to me.
>
> I'm not sure why the order of the destructors are different in the
> second
> example. *Could it have anything to do with the fact that the code you
> posted for the second example is catching the exception by value? *Or
> is the missing '&' a typo?

Thanks for ur reply. there was no typo.. I want to catching the
exception by value.

regards

Re: Basic question C++ exception
 

On 2008-06-29 20:28, Vijay wrote:
> On Jun 29, 12:41 pm, Erik Wikström <Erik-wikst...@telia.com> wrote:
>> On 2008-06-29 17:34, Vijay wrote:

>> > Question 2.
>>
>> > class A
>> > {
>> > public:
>> > A(){cout<<"In Constructor\n";}
>> > A(const A&){cout<<"In Copy Constructor\n";}
>> > ~A(){cout<<"In Destructor\n";}
>> > };
>> > try{
>> > cout<<"In Try\n";
>> > throw A();
>> > }
>> > catch(A a)
>> > {
>> > cout<<"In Catch\n";
>> > }
>> > output:
>> > In Try;
>> > In Constructor
>> > In Copy Constructor
>> > In Catch
>> > In Destructor
>> > In Destructor
>>
>> > Why object created by throw A() has not been deleted while exiting try
>> > block in above code?
>>
>> The object created by thow can not be destroyes before it has been used
>> to initialise the object in the exception-handler (the extra copy has
>> been eliminated). It will also live until the last exception handler has
>> run (if the object is destroyed and you re-throw what would happen
>> then?), so it is the last destructor to run.
>>
>> If I comment out the copy-constructor my compiler does not optimise away
>> the extra copy and I get the following result:
>>
>> In Try
>> In Constructor // throw A(), followed by a copy-constructor
>> In Destructor // The object created by A() is destroyed
>> In Catch // a in the catch(A a) is copy-constructed first
>> In Destructor // The object created in the handler is destroyes
>> In Destructor // The exception object dies
>
> Thanks. I think, because of compiler optimization, i am getting
> confused.
> one more point: in your above result, i didnt get two lines
> In Destructor // The object created by A() is destroyed
> and
> In Destructor // The exception object dies
>
> object created by A() is exception object. right?
> If no, then when exception object is created which dies in last line?

No, the exception object is a copy of the object created by A(), unless
the compiler uses the optimisation, in which case the exception-object
and the object created by A() is the same (and in that case it will no
be destroyed until the end of the exception-handler).

--
Erik Wikström

Re: Basic question C++ exception
 

On Jun 29, 2:55*pm, Erik Wikström <Erik-wikst...@telia.com> wrote:
> On 2008-06-29 20:28, Vijay wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 29, 12:41 pm, Erik Wikström <Erik-wikst...@telia.com> wrote:
> >> On 2008-06-29 17:34, Vijay wrote:
> >> > Question 2.
>
> >> > class A
> >> > {
> >> > public:
> >> > * *A(){cout<<"In Constructor\n";}
> >> > * * * *A(const A&){cout<<"In Copy Constructor\n";}
> >> > * * ~A(){cout<<"In Destructor\n";}
> >> > };
> >> > try{
> >> > * *cout<<"In Try\n";
> >> > * *throw A();
> >> > * *}
> >> > catch(A a)
> >> > {
> >> > * *cout<<"In Catch\n";
> >> > }
> >> > output:
> >> > In Try;
> >> > In Constructor
> >> > In Copy Constructor
> >> > In Catch
> >> > In Destructor
> >> > In Destructor
>
> >> > Why object created by throw A() has not been deleted while exiting try
> >> > block in above code?
>
> >> The object created by thow can not be destroyes before it has been used
> >> to initialise the object in the exception-handler (the extra copy has
> >> been eliminated). It will also live until the last exception handler has
> >> run (if the object is destroyed and you re-throw what would happen
> >> then?), so it is the last destructor to run.
>
> >> If I comment out the copy-constructor my compiler does not optimise away
> >> the extra copy and I get the following result:
>
> >> In Try
> >> In Constructor * * // throw A(), followed by a copy-constructor
> >> In Destructor * * *// The object created by A() is destroyed
> >> In Catch * * * * * // a in the catch(A a) is copy-constructed first
> >> In Destructor * * *// The object created in the handler is destroyes
> >> In Destructor * * *// The exception object dies
>
> > Thanks. I think, because of compiler optimization, i am getting
> > confused.
> > one more point: in your above result, i didnt get two lines
> > In Destructor * * *// The object created by A() is destroyed
> > and
> > In Destructor * * *// The exception object dies
>
> > object created by A() is exception object. right?
> > If no, then when exception object is created which dies in last line?
>
> No, the exception object is a copy of the object created by A(), unless
> the compiler uses the optimisation, in which case the exception-object
> and the object created by A() is the same (and in that case it will no
> be destroyed until the end of the exception-handler).
>
Got it. Thanks :)
> --
> Erik Wikström

Re: Basic question C++ exception
 

On Jun 29, 8:28 pm, Vijay <mt.vi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 29, 12:41 pm, Erik Wikström <Erik-wikst...@telia.com> wrote:

[...]
> Thanks. I think, because of compiler optimization, i am getting
> confused.
> one more point: in your above result, i didnt get two lines
> In Destructor // The object created by A() is destroyed
> and
> In Destructor // The exception object dies
>
> object created by A() is exception object. right?
> If no, then when exception object is created which dies in last line?

Just a note, but in such experimenting, I would recommend
outputting the this pointer in your trace output. That way, you
can easily see which destructors are for which objects.

--
James Kanze (GABI Software) email:james.kanze@gmail.com
Conseils en informatique orientée objet/
Beratung in objektorientierter Datenverarbeitung
9 place Sémard, 78210 St.-Cyr-l'École, France, +33 (0)1 30 23 00 34