standards-compliance

Consider: std::vector<int> v; v.reserve(1); v.push_back(1); // is this statement guaranteed not to throw? I've chosen int because it has no constructors that could throw - obviously if some copy constructor of T throws, then that exception escapes vector<T>::push_back . This question applies as much to insert as push_back , but it was inspired by Is it safe to push_back 'dynamically allocated object' to vector? , which happens to ask about push_back . In the C++03 and C++0x standard/FCD, the descriptions of vector::insert say that if no reallocation happens, iterators/references before the

(Recap on pointer tagging: where the size of an object means that a limited number of bits in its pointer will always go unused and can be re-purposed for other uses, such as marking the object's type.) An excellent answer to my previous question on this subject confirmed that the naive method of converting pointers to integers and doing things to those integers cannot technically be relied upon to work (disregarding its popularity in practice). Upon thinking about it some more, I think I have a solution that works for the specific case described in the original question (all objects are the

The sizeof char, int, long double... can vary from one compiler to another. But do I have the guarantee according to the C++11 or C11 standard that the size of any signed and unsigned fundamental integral type is the same ? The C++11 Standard says about integer types: (§3.9.1/3) For each of the standard signed integer types, there exists a corresponding (but different) standard unsigned integer type: “unsigned char”, “unsigned short int”, “unsigned int”, “unsigned long int”, and “unsigned long long int”, each of which occupies the same amount of storage and has the same alignment requirements