From: John Maddock (boost.regex_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-09-30 05:21:14
> After following the discussion, it is not at all clear to me which
> should I take to handle BOOST_NO_EXCEPTIONS :)
> Finally I rewrote the try-catch blocks of my indexed_set library to
> use scope guards, which will work in any situation. Admittedly, it'll
> add some runtime penalty, but I don't think it is significant.
I guess I haven't explained things very well: you are right that scoped
guards will work in any situation, and to be honest I happen to think they
are easier to maintain as well. However, the point I was trying to make was
that if the compiler doesn't support C++ exceptions, then neither structured
C exceptions nor POSIX signals will ever unwind C++ objects on the stack.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk