Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 1026965
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 16, 20262026-05-16T12:09:56+00:00 2026-05-16T12:09:56+00:00

I have some clean up in a terminate_handler and it is possible to throw

  • 0

I have some clean up in a terminate_handler and it is possible to throw an exception. Do I need to worry about catching it to prevent recursive calls to the terminate_handler? With gcc, it seems this can’t happen and we just go into abort. Is that true of the standard or is the behavior undefined?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-16T12:09:57+00:00Added an answer on May 16, 2026 at 12:09 pm

    A terminate handler is not allowed to return (§18.6.​3.1/2); it must end the program (the default handler calls abort()). If it consisted of:

    void my_terminate()
    {
        throw 5;
    }
    

    You’d get undefined behavior, because you would leave the function (because the exception propagates) without having terminated the program. So if you have code that could throw, make sure you catch all exceptions, like this:

    void my_terminate()
    {
        try
        {
            // stuff
        }
        catch(...)
        {
            // too bad
        }
    
        abort();
    }
    

    However (to answer the title question), I don’t see anything that restricts it from being entered again, so this should be technically be fine:

    void my_terminate()
    {
        static int counter = 0;
    
        if (counter++ < 5)
            terminate();
    
        abort();
    }
    
    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.