问题
For the code below, result is "EA Exception Finished", which means although we threw at derived class it caught by base class. Is it always? And if so, how can I make the derived class catches, thus "EB Exception Finished" appears?
Also I can't exactly get what does it mean by throw EB()
and catch(EA&)
. And does catch(EA&)
means the catch block gets a reference for EA object?
Sorry for my ignorance. If you recommend me a book or something to refer about exception structure, that'd be great help.
class EA {};
class EB: public EA {};
void F()
{
throw EB(); // throw at EB().
}
int main()
{
try
{
F();
}
catch(EA&) // caught here??
{
std::cout<<"EA Exception";
}
catch(EB&) // why not me? every time?
{
std::cout<<"EB Exception";
}
std::cout<<" Finished"<<std::endl;
return 0;
}
回答1:
Reason:
Upcasting
of derived class to base. and hence always getting stuck on the first catch.
回答2:
Change the order of the catch
blocks to fix that behavior:
#include <iostream>
class EA {};
class EB: public EA {};
void F()
{
throw EB(); // throw at EB().
}
int main()
{
try
{
F();
}
catch(EB&) // why not me? every time?
{
std::cout<<"EB Exception";
}
catch(EA&) // caught here??
{
std::cout<<"EA Exception";
}
std::cout<<" Finished"<<std::endl;
return 0;
}
The compiler even warns you about this:
main.cpp:21:3: warning: exception of type 'EB' will be caught
catch(EB&) // why not me? every time?
^~~~~
main.cpp:17:3: warning: by earlier handler for 'EA'
catch(EA&) // caught here??
^~~~~
回答3:
As mentioned by the standard in [except.handle] (working draft):
The handlers for a try block are tried in order of appearance. That makes it possible to write handlers that can never be executed, for example by placing a handler for a derived class after a handler for a corresponding base class.
That's exactly what you did. Interesting indeed.
Invert the handlers to solve the issue.
回答4:
Because the catch blocks check in the order you declare them.
you first catch by EA&
.
EB is derived from EA, so this is a valid catch and the second catch gets ignored.
You want to have the most "specialized" exception-catch first. So if you switch the catch blocks it should work the other way.
回答5:
catch statements are inspected in order. EA&
matches, so it is used. EB&
can never be matched. You need to put the more specific catch first.
catch(EB&) // Will catch
{
std::cout<<"EB Exception";
}
catch(EA&) // and this would catch EA objects that aren't EB.
{
std::cout<<"EA Exception";
}
来源:https://stackoverflow.com/questions/39527963/why-throw-at-derived-class-catches-by-base