-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 113
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Removing noexcept to resolve issue reported by static analysis. #1462
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The equivalent noexcept
for the declaration in algorithm_fwd.h
should also be removed. This should resolve the CI failures.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What about noexcept
from the files for some patterns:
- include/oneapi/dpl/pstl/numeric_impl.h
- include/oneapi/dpl/pstl/experimental/internal/for_loop_impl.h
Of course, forward declarations should be fixed too.
…oexcept from forward declaration of __pattern_walk1_n
If the patterns aren't used with functors that perform memory allocation then the noexcept is valid. I'm not looking for a wide removal of the keyword, just removing it where we identify that an exception may indeed be thrown in the use cases we're testing. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
Changed were made by @SergeyKopienko to address feedback.
--------- Co-authored-by: Sergey Kopienko <>
The pattern is used by uninitialized_fill, which uses placement new to created objects, and new may throw a length_error exception. Issue was reported by static analysis tools.