Boost logo

Boost :

From: Alan.Griffiths_at_[hidden]
Date: 2003-09-03 12:10:05

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Abrahams [mailto:dave_at_[hidden]]
> Sent: 02 September 2003 18:46
> >
> > /2/ Instead of guessing we can ask him. He is amazingly
> tolerant of idiot
> > questions. :)
> Go for it ;-)

Done: here is what he has to say (with my summary of the discussion elided
for brevity)...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bjarne Stroustrup [mailto:bs_at_[hidden]]
> Sent: 03 September 2003 16:57
> There wasn't much experience with exceptions at the time I
> wrote that. I saw it
> in a few examples and extrapolated. Note that the amount of
> anti-MI hype tends
> to eliminate even good examples from common use.
> >Are you still of the opinion that this design is both common and good
> >practice? And have you time to explain why?
> I think that multiple inherited exception can be good design,
> for all the usual reasons for MI. I don't think we
> need to go to virtual bases. That's a
> complication that I don't see the need for.
> The example quoted by Dave with the ambiguous what() should -
> as ever - be resolved by overriding what() in the derived class.

Alan Griffiths
For more information about Barclays Capital, please
visit our web site at
Internet communications are not secure and therefore the Barclays 
Group does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this 
message.  Although the Barclays Group operates anti-virus programmes, 
it does not accept responsibility for any damage whatsoever that is 
caused by viruses being passed.  Any views or opinions presented are 
solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the 
Barclays Group.  Replies to this email may be monitored by the Barclays 
Group for operational or business reasons.

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