Boost logo

Boost :

From: Alexander Terekhov (terekhov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-06-06 07:53:03

David Abrahams wrote:
> > bool expected_exception<T>();
> > ...."
> >
> > He hasn't yet replied... well, perhaps YOU could shed some light? ;-)
> I don't know; I haven't been probing people about changes we could
> make to the EH specification, and I doubt I could do it effectively
> because I don't understand the issues at a deep level. The way the
> committee works is that those who care (meaning you) have to
> participate, or nothing changes.
> I can say that I _sense_ no general desire to change anything
> significant about EH, but that may just be because nobody knows
> there's an important issue. With that, I'll repeat: please take this
> non-Boost-related part of your discussion off-list.

Okay. But fix the "", please.

FYI, <Forward-Inline>

-------- Original Message --------
Message-ID: <3EE08DDC.A3A7A32D_at_[hidden]>
Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2003 14:49:32 +0200
Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
Subject: std0X::expected_exception<T>()

 template<class T> bool expected_exception() throw();
 Returns: true if matching handler is found.
 Notes: if expected_exception<T>() returns false then
 throwing T (at the point of expected_exception<T>()
 invocation) will result in the invocation of unexpected()
 handler with an exception consider caught. In effect,
 (in this new edition of this International Standard:-)

     if (!std::expected_exception<T>()) {
       throw T(/*...*/);

 is equivalent to:

     if (!std::expected_exception<T>()) {
       try {
         throw T(/*...*/);
       catch(const T&) {

Would you vote against it? Why?


Well, "the context" is this:
([boost] Re: Exception handling... it's time to fix the


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