From: me22 (me22.ca_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-11-11 00:27:12
On 10/11/05, David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Boost::lambda has for loops, neh?
for more details )
That being said, would it be a wise design choice to need large
amounts of code in a FINALLY block?
> Practically speaking, destructors are much better than catch(...) for
> finally-like operations on many platforms. Several of them have a
> similar problem to Windows, where catch(...) catches asynchronous
I meant using them inside the destructor call to prevent any
exceptions from escaping the destructor.
And lambda continues to impress--I hadn't realised that lambda already
has the try_catch functor magic ( that I mentioned above ) already
- Scott McMurray
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk