Re: [boost] Re: Exceptions as streams

From: Victor A. Wagner, Jr. (vawjr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-10 10:48:02

At Tuesday 2004-02-10 00:01, you wrote:
>On 10/02/2004, at 6:54 PM, Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
>
>>I think boost should encourage best practices, not practices which
>>work acceptably only in limited circumstances without providing
>>substantial benefits.
>
>Fair call.
>
>>For miscellaneous errors, you can use one the
>>standard exception classes, such as runtime_error, using a
>>stringstream to format the results, if you like:
>>
>>      stringstream s;
>>      s << "somebody made " << x << " mistakes";
>>      throw runtime_error(s.str());
>>
>>This gives you the results you want, doesn't it? Is it really that
>>inconvenient?
>
>Oh, well I'm alright, because I'll go on using my streamy exception where 
>I think it's warranted.
>
>Convenience is an interesting question though.  To some extent (no offence 
>to the authors of excellent libraries that I use a lot and am extremely 
>grateful for) my use of boost::lambda and boost::bind amounts to avoiding 
>the inconvenience of hand writing function objects - but I wouldn't want 
>to live without them.
>
>Funny that gcc's runtime_error uses a string copy constructor that could 
>potentially throw :-)

what exception do you see it throwing (possibly) ?

>cheers,
>Geoff
>
>_______________________________________________
>Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>

Victor A. Wagner Jr.      http://rudbek.com
The five most dangerous words in the English language:
               "There oughta be a law"