Subject: Re: [boost] Tests are a mess
From: Emil Dotchevski (emil_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-09-10 17:30:22
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 2:20 PM, Emil Dotchevski
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 12:49 PM, Pete Bartlett <pete_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> Robert Ramey wrote:
>>>[..] But don't go foisting on me a whole new layer of work [...]
>> Sadly, by introducing boost::serialization::throw_exception, you have
>> foisted work on me and other users of your library. Now we have to implement
>> boost::serialization::throw_exception instead of just having one
>> boost::throw_exception. This is exactly the kind of breakage you've been so
>> strongly opposed to.
> You didn't have to implement boost::serialization::throw_exception.
> That was your own decision, which I don't intend to object. I've
> learned that simply because I don't see the logic behind a given
> decision, doesn't mean that it was illogical.
Oh, DUH I *completely* misunderstood the previous post!
Reverge Studios, Inc.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk