[boost] Re: throw() on trivial functions (Was: Pedantic changes to noncopyable)

From: Valentin Bonnard (Bonnard.V_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-03-20 11:39:38

Don Waugaman wrote:

> I can see where this would be true in the general case of exception
> specifications, but isn't a throw() specification on a trival function
> an (ahem) exception to the rule?

If the functin is trivial, writing throw() is also a complete 
waste of time: the compiler already knows it.

On some compilers, it's a pessimisation is all cases.

I don't see any reasons to write throw-spec on trivial 
functions if we don't do it generally for all functions.

-- 
Valentin Bonnard