Plan for Exceptions and @nogc?

[Matthias Bentrup via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 17 February 2015 at 18:30:24 UTC, Jonathan Marler 
wrote:
> I thought of the same thing but then realized that it would be 
> impossible to ensure that the catch block wouldn't stomp on 
> that memory.

The catcher wouldn't stomp any more on the thrower's memory than 
a function stomps on the memory of its caller. All the data of 
the thrower is safe, because it is above the stack pointer. The 
unwinding hasn't been done at that point.