Boost logo

Boost :

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-11-22 15:50:20


From: "David B. Held" <dheld_at_[hidden]>
> Peter Dimov wrote:
>
> > From: "David B. Held"
> >
> > >Peter Dimov wrote:
> > >
> > >>My answer is that specifying the precise semantics of what() for
> > >>every documented exception type is a necessary prerequisite.
> > >>(Implies that the standard needs to be fixed, too.)
> > >
> > >Would it be worthwhile to define a different member function
> > >(possibly in a std::exception-derived boost_exception) that returns
> > >the precisely specified key that you desire (rather than changing the
> > >requirements for what())?
> >
> > What _are_ the requirements for what()?
>
> Well, as you were saying, that it return a unique documented value for
> each exception type. Or did I not understand you correctly?

You said: "(rather than changing the requirements for what())". What are the
requirements for what() that I, supposedly, want changed?


Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk