Boost logo

Boost :

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-12-18 09:12:12

From: "Beman Dawes" <bdawes_at_[hidden]>
> How about these member functions (in addition to what()):
> int native_error() const { return m_sys_err; }
> // Note: a value of 0 implies a library (rather than system) error
> error_code error() const { return m_err; }
> const string & function() const;
> // name of the function throwing the exception

Could this be char const * function() const? It seems that if you can return
a reference to a string, you can return a char const *? Or perhaps the
intent was to return a string by value.

> const path & path1() const; // argument 1 to function; may be empty()
> const path & path2() const; // argument 2 to function; may be empty()

What would the implications be if we changed these to return 'char const *'
or 'string' to eliminate the dependency on 'path'?

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at