总之，微软Visual c++确实支持try，它在MFC应用中一直被用作捕获严重异常的方法，否则会导致崩溃。例如;

int CMyApp::Run() 
{
    __try
    {
        int i = CWinApp::Run();
        m_Exitok = MAGIC_EXIT_NO;
        return i;
    }
    __finally
    {
        if (m_Exitok != MAGIC_EXIT_NO)
            FaultHandler();
    }
}

在过去，我用它来做一些事情，比如在退出之前保存打开文件的备份。不过，某些JIT调试设置会破坏这种机制。

不，c++不支持'finally'块。原因是c++支持RAII:“资源获取是初始化”——对于一个真正有用的概念来说，这是一个糟糕的名字。

其思想是，对象的析构函数负责释放资源。当对象具有自动存储持续时间时，当创建对象的块退出时，对象的析构函数将被调用——即使该块在出现异常时退出。以下是Bjarne Stroustrup对这个话题的解释。

RAII的一个常见用途是锁定互斥量:

// A class with implements RAII
class lock
{
    mutex &m_;

public:
    lock(mutex &m)
      : m_(m)
    {
        m.acquire();
    }
    ~lock()
    {
        m_.release();
    }
};

// A class which uses 'mutex' and 'lock' objects
class foo
{
    mutex mutex_; // mutex for locking 'foo' object
public:
    void bar()
    {
        lock scopeLock(mutex_); // lock object.

        foobar(); // an operation which may throw an exception

        // scopeLock will be destructed even if an exception
        // occurs, which will release the mutex and allow
        // other functions to lock the object and run.
    }
};

RAII also simplifies using objects as members of other classes. When the owning class' is destructed, the resource managed by the RAII class gets released because the destructor for the RAII-managed class gets called as a result. This means that when you use RAII for all members in a class that manage resources, you can get away with using a very simple, maybe even the default, destructor for the owner class since it doesn't need to manually manage its member resource lifetimes. (Thanks to Mike B for pointing this out.)

For those familliar with C# or VB.NET, you may recognize that RAII is similar to .NET deterministic destruction using IDisposable and 'using' statements. Indeed, the two methods are very similar. The main difference is that RAII will deterministically release any type of resource -- including memory. When implementing IDisposable in .NET (even the .NET language C++/CLI), resources will be deterministically released except for memory. In .NET, memory is not deterministically released; memory is only released during garbage collection cycles.

†有些人认为“破坏是资源放弃”是RAII习语更准确的名称。

正如许多人所说，解决方案是使用c++ 11的特性来避免最终阻塞。其中一个特性是unique_ptr。

以下是Mephane使用RAII模式编写的答案。

#include <vector>
#include <memory>
#include <list>
using namespace std;

class Foo
{
 ...
};

void DoStuff(vector<string> input)
{
    list<unique_ptr<Foo> > myList;

    for (int i = 0; i < input.size(); ++i)
    {
      myList.push_back(unique_ptr<Foo>(new Foo(input[i])));
    }

    DoSomeStuff(myList);
}

这里有更多关于在c++标准库容器中使用unique_ptr的介绍

另一个“finally”块模拟使用c++ 11 lambda函数

template <typename TCode, typename TFinallyCode>
inline void with_finally(const TCode &code, const TFinallyCode &finally_code)
{
    try
    {
        code();
    }
    catch (...)
    {
        try
        {
            finally_code();
        }
        catch (...) // Maybe stupid check that finally_code mustn't throw.
        {
            std::terminate();
        }
        throw;
    }
    finally_code();
}

让我们希望编译器会优化上面的代码。

现在我们可以这样写代码:

with_finally(
    [&]()
    {
        try
        {
            // Doing some stuff that may throw an exception
        }
        catch (const exception1 &)
        {
            // Handling first class of exceptions
        }
        catch (const exception2 &)
        {
            // Handling another class of exceptions
        }
        // Some classes of exceptions can be still unhandled
    },
    [&]() // finally
    {
        // This code will be executed in all three cases:
        //   1) exception was not thrown at all
        //   2) exception was handled by one of the "catch" blocks above
        //   3) exception was not handled by any of the "catch" block above
    }
);

如果你愿意，你可以把这个习语包装成“try - finally”宏:

// Please never throw exception below. It is needed to avoid a compilation error
// in the case when we use "begin_try ... finally" without any "catch" block.
class never_thrown_exception {};

#define begin_try    with_finally([&](){ try
#define finally      catch(never_thrown_exception){throw;} },[&]()
#define end_try      ) // sorry for "pascalish" style :(

现在"finally"块在c++ 11中可用:

begin_try
{
    // A code that may throw
}
catch (const some_exception &)
{
    // Handling some exceptions
}
finally
{
    // A code that is always executed
}
end_try; // Sorry again for this ugly thing

就我个人而言，我不喜欢“宏”版本的“finally”习语，宁愿使用纯粹的“with_finally”函数，即使在这种情况下语法更笨重。

您可以在这里测试上面的代码:http://coliru.stacked-crooked.com/a/1d88f64cb27b3813

PS

如果你的代码中需要一个finally块，那么作用域守卫或ON_FINALLY/ON_EXCEPTION宏可能会更好地满足你的需求。

下面是ON_FINALLY/ON_EXCEPTION的用法示例:

void function(std::vector<const char*> &vector)
{
    int *arr1 = (int*)malloc(800*sizeof(int));
    if (!arr1) { throw "cannot malloc arr1"; }
    ON_FINALLY({ free(arr1); });

    int *arr2 = (int*)malloc(900*sizeof(int));
    if (!arr2) { throw "cannot malloc arr2"; }
    ON_FINALLY({ free(arr2); });

    vector.push_back("good");
    ON_EXCEPTION({ vector.pop_back(); });

    ...

我有一个用例，我认为它最终应该是c++ 11语言中完全可以接受的一部分，因为我认为从流的角度来看，它更容易阅读。我的用例是线程的消费者/生产者链，其中在运行结束时发送一个哨兵nullptr以关闭所有线程。

如果c++支持它，你会希望你的代码看起来像这样:

    extern Queue downstream, upstream;

    int Example()
    {
        try
        {
           while(!ExitRequested())
           {
             X* x = upstream.pop();
             if (!x) break;
             x->doSomething();
             downstream.push(x);
           } 
        }
        finally { 
            downstream.push(nullptr);
        }
    }

我认为把finally声明放在循环的开始更符合逻辑，因为它发生在循环退出之后……但这只是一厢情愿的想法，因为我们无法在c++中实现它。注意，下游队列连接到另一个线程，所以你不能在下游的析构函数中放入哨兵推(nullptr)，因为此时它不能被销毁……它需要保持活动状态，直到另一个线程接收到nullptr。

下面是如何使用带有lambda的RAII类来做同样的事情:

    class Finally
    {
    public:

        Finally(std::function<void(void)> callback) : callback_(callback)
        {
        }
        ~Finally()
        {
            callback_();
        }
        std::function<void(void)> callback_;
    };

下面是你如何使用它:

    extern Queue downstream, upstream;

    int Example()
    {
        Finally atEnd([](){ 
           downstream.push(nullptr);
        });
        while(!ExitRequested())
        {
           X* x = upstream.pop();
           if (!x) break;
           x->doSomething();
           downstream.push(x);
        }
    }

很抱歉挖了这么老的一个线程，但下面的推理有一个重大错误:

RAII将异常安全的责任从对象的用户转移到对象的设计者(和实现者)。我认为这是正确的地方，因为你只需要让异常安全正确一次(在设计/实现中)。通过使用finally，您需要在每次使用对象时都获得正确的异常安全性。

通常情况下，你必须处理动态分配的对象，动态数量的对象等。在try块中，一些代码可能会创建许多对象(有多少是在运行时确定的)，并将指向它们的指针存储在一个列表中。现在，这不是一个奇异的场景，但很常见。在这种情况下，你会想写这样的东西

void DoStuff(vector<string> input)
{
  list<Foo*> myList;

  try
  {    
    for (int i = 0; i < input.size(); ++i)
    {
      Foo* tmp = new Foo(input[i]);
      if (!tmp)
        throw;

      myList.push_back(tmp);
    }

    DoSomeStuff(myList);
  }
  finally
  {
    while (!myList.empty())
    {
      delete myList.back();
      myList.pop_back();
    }
  }
}

当然，当超出作用域时，列表本身将被销毁，但这不会清除您创建的临时对象。

相反，你必须走一条丑陋的路:

void DoStuff(vector<string> input)
{
  list<Foo*> myList;

  try
  {    
    for (int i = 0; i < input.size(); ++i)
    {
      Foo* tmp = new Foo(input[i]);
      if (!tmp)
        throw;

      myList.push_back(tmp);
    }

    DoSomeStuff(myList);
  }
  catch(...)
  {
  }

  while (!myList.empty())
  {
    delete myList.back();
    myList.pop_back();
  }
}

另外:为什么即使是托管语言也会提供一个final块，尽管垃圾收集器会自动释放资源?

提示:使用“finally”可以做的不仅仅是内存释放。