This page is a snapshot from the LWG issues list, see the Library Active Issues List for more information and the meaning of Resolved status.

### 2867. Bad footnote about explicit exception-specification

Section: 16.4.6.13 [res.on.exception.handling] Status: Resolved Submitter: Great Britain Opened: 2017-02-03 Last modified: 2020-09-06

Priority: Not Prioritized

View all other issues in [res.on.exception.handling].

View all issues with Resolved status.

Discussion:

Addresses GB 40

The freedom referenced in footnote 189 was curtailed in C++11 to allow only non-throwing specifications. The footnote is both wrong, and unnecessary.

Proposed change:

Strike footnote 189.

[2017-02-03, Daniel comments]

The referenced footnote had the following content in the ballot document N4604:

> That is, an implementation may provide an explicit exception-specification that defines the subset of "any" exceptions thrown by that function. This implies that the implementation may list implementation-defined types in such an exception-specification.

In N4618 this footnote has already been removed, I therefore suggest to resolve the issue as "Resolved by editorial change".

[2017-02-13, Alisdair comments]

Just to confirm that issue 2867 was filed when it looked like the paper to remove exception specifications from the language had missed C++17. The very specific edit requested by the issue can be found in the paper P0003R5 that was applied.

I suggest we mark as resolved by the above paper, rather than "resolved editorially".

Proposed resolution:

Resolved by accepting P0003R5.