From: Emil Dotchevski (emil_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-09-30 20:36:39
> >> I'm not keen on the use of operator<< to add the data to the exceptions.
> > I do share your concern, but consider that whatever we use for boost
> > exception should support easy composition, because it needs to work
> > when used in a throw expression directly:
> > throw my_error() <<
> > error_info<tag_errno>(errno) <<
> > error_info<tag_name>(name);
> > Instead of << we could use .add:
> > throw my_error().
> > add(error_info<tag_errno>(errno)).
> > add(error_info<tag_name>(name));
> > This isn't bad, but in my opinion the << syntax is better despite my
> > strong dislike for operator overloading.
> Maybe a more or less obvious choice will do
> throw my_error() = error_info<tag>(whatever),
> error_info<another_tag>(something_else) // ...
I don't know, I'd rather use .add(), to be honest.
Also, in an off-list discussion, Peter Dimov pointed out that instead
of layering .add calls directly in the throw expression, we could
I'm not strongly opposed to that either.
Anyway, I think that operator<< is a good compromise, but if others
feel strongly against it I'll happily change it to .add().
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk