Re: [boost] [function] "paranoia" vs efficiency

Subject: Re: [boost] [function] "paranoia" vs efficiency
From: Mathias Gaunard (mathias.gaunard_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-10-02 10:26:59

Domagoj Saric wrote:
> As far as I can see boost::function<>::operator() performs:
> if (this->empty())
>       boost::throw_exception(bad_function_call());
> before invoking the stored function (object)...
> My question is why or why only this "checked"/"safe" approach/method of
> invocation exists?

BOOST_ASSERT(!empty()) would be better in my opinion indeed, but it's 
hard to make that change now for compatibility reasons.