[boost] Re: Exception safety guarantie

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-07-30 09:04:13

Pavol Droba <droba_at_[hidden]> writes:

> For me, this seems rather fine. I have tried to sumarize something similar
> in <http://tinyurl.com/3wgvu>.

The "defintion" of the strong guarantee here is just wrong:

  Some functions can provide the strong exception-safety
  guarantee. That means that following statements are true:

  If an exception is thrown, there are no effects 
  other than those of the function
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I don't mean to pick on you, Pavol, but I don't understand why this
keeps happening: people seem unsatisfied with my original wording and
make changes that alter the meaning.  In fact, the statement that a
function has "no effects other than those of the function" is a
meaningless tautology.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
http://www.boost-consulting.com