From: Pavel Vozenilek (pavel_vozenilek_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-08-09 09:17:55
"Emil Dotchevski" wrote:
> I find myself repeating what I said earlier, but I think this is the
> of what you're trying to achieve with the "visitor" approach of hanling
> exceptions: you are replacing the "catch-by-type" semantics of C++ with
> "catch-everything-and-examine-its-value" semantics.
Actually, the way exceptions are handled is
completely independent of boost::exception itself.
One could use chain of catch, Jeremy Day's library
or the approach suggested by Andreas Huber
or any combination.
The explicit support for a "exception transformer"
inside boost::exception is not needed (visiting
all stored data is a different thing).
So my arguing is OT in this regard.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk