Subject: Re: [boost] 5 Observations - My experience with the boost libraries
From: Emil Dotchevski (emildotchevski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-23 18:48:37
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 2:43 PM, Tom Brinkman <reportbase2007_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> In any event, my point is that c++ exception handeling should be optional.
> Boost libraries need to be updated to reflect this.
Look at the design of C++ constructors: the postcondition of a
constructor is that the object instance is initialized successfully.
Had Stroustrup listened to people arguing about "optional" exception
handling, the C++ constructors would have been useless because they
wouldn't have that postcondition.
It is the same with any other use of exceptions. Make them optional,
and you throw away the *only* reason to use them in the first place:
to enforce postconditions.
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