Re: [boost] [config] Proposed BOOST_NOEXCEPT_NOTHROW macro

Subject: Re: [boost] [config] Proposed BOOST_NOEXCEPT_NOTHROW macro
From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-01-03 10:06:32

On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Stewart, Robert <Robert.Stewart_at_[hidden]> wrote:
...
>> "BOOST_NOTHROW" is short, conveys the right idea, but isn't
>> forward looking.  Then again, when we can ignore C++03, s/BOOST_NOTHROW/BOOST_NOEXCEPT/ would bring all code into C++11
>> without harm.
>
> That's an interesting suggestion.
>
> We already have BOOST_CONSTEXPR_OR_CONST, so I'm still leaning toward
> BOOST_NOEXCEPT_OR_NOTHROW just for consistency. We can do a global
> change to BOOST_NOEXCEPT for that name, too, when we no longer want to
> support C++03 compilers.
>
> Given that it is a 3-day holiday weekend in the US, I'll give it
> another day or two. But then we need to move on to higher priority
> work.

This finally got committed to trunk this morning, using the name
BOOST_NOEXCEPT_OR_NOTHROW. Docs updated.

Sorry for the delay,

--Beman