[boost] Re: Re: Variant implementation change (was re:unions)finalsummary

From: Rainer Deyke (rainerd_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-09 17:37:06

Brock Peabody wrote:
> Yes, and the point I was trying to make with (5) really has nothing
> to do with exceptions anyway.  Making it so that variants can be
> singular
> increases the complexity and chance for error in all code that uses
> variants.

And my point is that having a singular state that can only be entered as a
result of an exception in a variant function that only provides the basic
exception guarantee is morally equivalent to not having a singular state at
all.  Any code that relies on the value of the variant after such an
exception has been thrown is broken anyways.

-- 
Rainer Deyke - rainerd_at_[hidden] - http://eldwood.com