Re: [boost] [function] function wrappingwithnoexceptionsafetyguarantee

Subject: Re: [boost] [function] function wrappingwithnoexceptionsafetyguarantee
From: Domagoj Saric (dsaritz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-11-08 19:24:13

"Daniel Walker" <daniel.j.walker_at_[hidden]> wrote in message 
news:AANLkTin+bj=YeGtpo7sqLMUq2Nx3uG_teEFbcDMsM5Eb_at_mail.gmail.com...
> On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 7:20 PM, Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr.
> <jhellrung_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> Would it also be appropriate to measure the "space/call", in addition to
>> "time/call" and "space/type"?  Or is there no difference, or had this 
>> been
>> addressed already?
>
> Well, a call to boost::function does not cost any additional space.

How (or better, why) can you possibly claim something as plainly false as 
this..?

That this is false is obvious to anyone just following the discussion (and 
all the talk about the redundant if empty then throw logic/code) not to 
mention to someone that actually poked around the source code or even looked 
at the generated code....

-- 
"What Huxley teaches is that in the age of advanced technology, spiritual
devastation is more likely to come from an enemy with a smiling face than
from one whose countenance exudes suspicion and hate."
Neil Postman