Subject: Re: [boost] [exception] Virtual inheritance with no default constructors
From: Emil Dotchevski (emildotchevski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-05-15 12:55:56
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 7:57 AM, Adam Badura <abadura_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 11:26 PM, Adam Badura <abadura_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> If I am not mistaken it shouldn't be hard to allow
> boost::diagnostic_information act on exception_ptr like on ordinary
Ah, yes this makes sense. Thanks for the suggestion, I'll add
exception_ptr handling in diagnostic_information.
> And yes. I know you are against chaining exceptions. However I showed some
> use cases and you haven't showed any other solution to those (which does not
> mean that non exists). Also note that simply copying data from one exception
> to the other will not do as it might override some data (like the basic
> ones: file name, line number and function name).
Well, I didn't want this to turn into an argument for or against
wrapping, but consider a generic context:
void open_file( boost::function<void(char const *)> const & loader,
char const * name )
catch( ... )
Sure, callers of open_file can now catch open_file_error. And then
what? It may contain any exception at all in it. You have the
equivalent of a void pointer: it's only useful if you know its
original type, so you can "cast" it back to it.
How do I deal with this situation *generically*? Obviously, if I have
to deal with it specifically, there's no point in wrapping, I'd simply
catch the original exception.
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