You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@arrow.apache.org by "Wes McKinney (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2016/05/04 17:06:12 UTC
[jira] [Commented] (ARROW-187) [C++] Decide on how pedantic we want
to be about exceptions
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-187?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15270995#comment-15270995 ]
Wes McKinney commented on ARROW-187:
------------------------------------
Good point. I don't have enough experience to know how real the risk is, but it definitely safer to avoid expensive allocations in the constructor (via static factory + Init method).
> [C++] Decide on how pedantic we want to be about exceptions
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ARROW-187
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-187
> Project: Apache Arrow
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: C++
> Reporter: Micah Kornfield
>
> We currently have code sprinkled around constructors that can technically fail because we either do a memcpy/allocation via vector copy constructor (we might be using a move constructor in places) and make_shared<>.
> These are very small memory allocations but they can throw std::bad_alloc.
> Technically, we would need to convert these to use Init or static factories.
> (types.h is one place to look)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)