[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       boost
Subject:    Re: [boost] [numeric] Applying trivial bugfix
From:       Antony Polukhin <antoshkka () gmail ! com>
Date:       2012-02-28 19:06:26
Message-ID: CAKqmYPaFJPnoaO9cz+xsDhW+TD6z-dYLrX3Eheo-P7nA7ikMDA () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

2012/2/28 Iain Denniston <iain.denniston@gmail.com>:
> Would it not then be a better idea to roll back to the old functionality and
> have an additional macro (BOOST_THROW_EXTENDED_EXCEPTION?) to provide the
> extended functionality the current macro provides?

+1

> Additional configuration options to make BOOST_THROW_EXCEPTION ==
> BOOST_THROW_EXTENDED_EXCEPTION and vice versa would allow users to make a
> decision if the extra information is important to them and allow others to
> avoid the costs when required

+1

After that, I would propose to replace all the "throw x" in all the
libraries with BOOST_THROW_EXCEPTION(x). This would close a lot of
feature requests, provide better support for compilations with
disabled exceptions and improve user control over the exceptions.

Best regards,
Antony Polukhin

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]