大多数人说永远不要从析构函数抛出异常——这样做会导致未定义的行为。Stroustrup指出，“vector析构函数显式地为每个元素调用析构函数。这意味着如果元素析构函数抛出，则vector销毁失败…实际上没有很好的方法来防止析构函数抛出异常，因此标准库不保证元素析构函数是否抛出”(摘自附录E3.2)。
这篇文章似乎不是这么说的——抛出析构函数或多或少是可以的。
所以我的问题是，如果从析构函数抛出导致未定义的行为，你如何处理析构函数期间发生的错误?
如果在清理操作期间发生错误，您会忽略它吗?如果它是一个可以在堆栈中处理但不能在析构函数中处理的错误，那么从析构函数抛出异常难道没有意义吗?
显然，这种错误很少见，但也有可能发生。
当前回答
我所在的小组认为，在析构函数中加入“作用域保护”模式在许多情况下都很有用——特别是对于单元测试。但是，要注意，在c++ 11中，抛出析构函数会导致调用std::terminate，因为析构函数隐式地用noexcept注释。
Andrzej krzemiezynski有一篇关于抛出析构函数的文章:
https://akrzemi1.wordpress.com/2011/09/21/destructors-that-throw/
他指出c++ 11有一种机制可以覆盖析构函数的默认noexcept:
In C++11, a destructor is implicitly specified as noexcept. Even if you add no specification and define your destructor like this: class MyType { public: ~MyType() { throw Exception(); } // ... }; The compiler will still invisibly add specification noexcept to your destructor. And this means that the moment your destructor throws an exception, std::terminate will be called, even if there was no double-exception situation. If you are really determined to allow your destructors to throw, you will have to specify this explicitly; you have three options: Explicitly specify your destructor as noexcept(false), Inherit your class from another one that already specifies its destructor as noexcept(false). Put a non-static data member in your class that already specifies its destructor as noexcept(false).
最后，如果您决定抛出析构函数，则应该始终注意双异常的风险(在堆栈因异常而被unwind时抛出)。这将导致调用std::terminate，这很少是您想要的。为了避免这种行为，你可以使用std::uncaught_exception()在抛出一个新的异常之前检查是否已经有一个异常。
其他回答
关于从析构函数抛出，真正要问自己的问题是“调用者可以用它做什么?”你是否真的可以对异常做一些有用的事情，来抵消从析构函数抛出的危险?
如果我销毁了一个Foo对象，而Foo析构函数抛出了一个异常，我可以合理地对它做什么?我可以记录，也可以忽略。这是所有。我不能“修复”它，因为Foo对象已经消失了。最好的情况是，我记录异常并继续，就像什么都没有发生一样(或者终止程序)。这真的值得通过从析构函数抛出来潜在地引起未定义的行为吗?
Martin Ba(上图)在正确的轨道上——你为RELEASE和COMMIT逻辑构建了不同的架构。
发布:
你应该吃任何错误。您正在释放内存、关闭连接等。系统中的任何人都不应该再看到这些东西，并且您正在将资源交还给操作系统。如果你看起来需要真正的错误处理，这可能是你的对象模型设计缺陷的结果。
提交:
This is where you want the same kind of RAII wrapper objects that things like std::lock_guard are providing for mutexes. With those you don't put the commit logic in the dtor AT ALL. You have a dedicated API for it, then wrapper objects that will RAII commit it in THEIR dtors and handle the errors there. Remember, you can CATCH exceptions in a destructor just fine; its issuing them that's deadly. This also lets you implement policy and different error handling just by building a different wrapper (e.g. std::unique_lock vs. std::lock_guard), and ensures you won't forget to call the commit logic- which is the only half-way decent justification for putting it in a dtor in the 1st place.
设置告警事件。通常，警报事件是在清理对象时通知失败的更好形式
Throwing out of a destructor can result in a crash, because this destructor might be called as part of "Stack unwinding". Stack unwinding is a procedure which takes place when an exception is thrown. In this procedure, all the objects that were pushed into the stack since the "try" and until the exception was thrown, will be terminated -> their destructors will be called. And during this procedure, another exception throw is not allowed, because it's not possible to handle two exceptions at a time, thus, this will provoke a call to abort(), the program will crash and the control will return to the OS.
c++的ISO草案(ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 22 N 4411)
因此，析构函数通常应该捕获异常，而不是让它们从析构函数传播出去。
为在try块到throw-的路径上构造的自动对象调用析构函数的过程 表达式称为“堆栈unwind”。[注意:如果在堆栈展开期间调用析构函数退出 异常，std::terminate被调用(15.5.1)。因此，析构函数通常应该捕获异常，而不是let 它们从析构函数中传播出去。-结束注]
