Boost logo

Boost :

From: Gennadiy Rozental (gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-06-16 23:38:57

"Daryle Walker" <dwalker07_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> While writing some other code, I checked out how some of the macros in
> Boost.Test are implemented. The BOOST_CHECK_THROW and
> BOOST_CHECK_EXCEPTION macros flag when an intentional exception was
> missed and when the expected exception type was caught. But what about
> when an exception of the _wrong_ type is thrown. Shouldn't there be a
> catch(...) that notes that the wrong type was caught and re-throws the
> error?

Any operation may throw an unexpected exception. To manage this Boost.Test
runs test cases under control of the Execution Monitor. Any exception thrown
from inside a test case gets caught and reported. So I believe current
semantic of above tools is correct.


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