Boost logo

Boost :

From: Edward Diener (eddielee_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-04-26 16:18:28


David Abrahams wrote:
> "Andrei Alexandrescu" <andrewalex_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
>> By the way, I believe what would be more interesting for Boost is the
>> recent article (http://www.cuj.com/experts/2106/alexandr.htm),
>> written by Petru Marginean and myself. (Warning - the article has
>> recently been
>> updated.)
>>
>> We have good experience in reducing source code size by using
>> enforcements. There are a number of interesting techniques used out
>> there, and I believe ENFORCE would be quite useful as a Boost
>> library.
>
> I browsed the article (I confess to not having read everything, so
> please correct any misapprehensions). My sense is that the technique
> is oriented towards detecting programmer errors and responding via an
> exception.

I don't think ENFORCE is oriented toward that at all. There's no orientation
involved other than to throw an exception based on a condition. I agree with
you that direct programming errors should generally not throw exceptions but
should ASSERT so that the programmer can fix the error. However I don't
think ENFORCE has anything to do with this debate about when to ASSERT and
when to throw exceptions. Perhaps the examples give the impression which you
have, but I think the problem is just choosing better examples in which one
would want to throw an exception and not a technical issue as to the
benefits of using ENFORCE in order to simplify exception throwing.


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