Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] The noexcept Specifier & Block
From: Alexander Terekhov (terekhov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-04-17 09:20:17

Sebastian Redl wrote:
> So throw() is deprecated. That doesn't change the fact that its behavior
> is very similar to what you propose for noexcept.

No, throw() injects catch(...) and I certainly don't want that for

With or without*** static checking, noexcept specifier is much better
than throw().

> I still think that the compile error for noexcept-marked functions is
> something we definitely want.

So that you can turn such compile errors into undefined behaviour using
noexcept blocks or just swallow exceptions?

***) See e.g.


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