From: Eugene Talagrand (boostdevel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-12-12 12:26:36
On 12/12/2005 11:34, Martin Bonner wrote:
> ----Original Message----
> From: Giovanni P. Deretta [mailto:gpderetta_at_[hidden]]
> Sent: 12 December 2005 16:00
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] [asio] my review
>>>I'm against introduzing exceptions. But I agree it may be possible to
>>>work a little more in the error handling. But, IMO, it should be like
>>>adding helper classes for this, but not throwing exceptions.
>>I think too that the current asio error handling interface is fine,
>>and it is not worth changing it a this time.
> Has anybody got a "non-ignorable return" class that they could add to boost?
> (A class that encapsulates a return value whose destructor asserts/aborts if
> the return code has not been examined or deliberatedly ignored by the
> calling code.)
> It would be a natural for this sort of application, and would be a generally
> useful utility class.
How about having it throw an exception instead? That way you could have
C-style errors if you choose, but exception-based handling if local
handling is not appropriate. It would be like a delayed optional
'throw'. It looks like it would fit in well here.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk