Boost logo

Boost :

From: Alexander Nasonov (alnsn_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-07-28 07:04:21

Oleg Abrosimov wrote:
>Why? boost doesn't have such a macro till now. For me it means that
>there was no need in such a generic facility and it can be concluded
>that a chance for name clash in future is only theoretical here.
> From other point actual meaning of this macro is "catch and handle" but
>BOOST_CATCH_AND_HANDLE is too verbose for me. I believe that BOOST_CATCH
>is good enough. It is a compromise between user-friendliness and
>brevity. Fill free to suggest something if you are not convinced yet.

Boost is close to the standard and some libraries implement functionality that will be replaced with C++ core feature one day. For example:

BOOST_TYPEDEF -> typedef
BOOST_FOREACH -> foreach

My first reaction on BOOST_CATCH was that it's a replacement or improved version C++'s catch.

So, this patterns BOOST_${C++200x keyword} is accosiated with pure library implementation of proposed keyword and this pattern BOOST_${C++98 keyword} is accosiated with improved version of some existing keyword.

Alexander Nasonov

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