Boost logo

Boost :

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-10-30 15:12:42

Bronek Kozicki <brok_at_[hidden]> writes:

> Ken Hagan wrote:
>> If your code is portable, then catch (...) is the only way
>> to deal with the fact that not everything is derived from
>> std::exception. I see nothing wrong with it.
> Shouldn't all exceptions in boost derive (directly or in most cases
> indirectly) from std::exception?
> IIRC discussions from comp.lang.c++.moderated (about "technology
> stolen by Andrei Alexandrescu from Yasland, ie. yet another
> std::vector<> implementation"), there was consensus that catch(...)
> is bad thing.

If you're interpreting my remarks (in part)
I don't agree that it's bad in general. On some platforms it's best
avoided, so in portable code it's best avoided, too.

Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting

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