Re: [boost] [function] function wrapping with noexceptionsafetyguarantee

Subject: Re: [boost] [function] function wrapping with noexceptionsafetyguarantee
From: Domagoj Saric (dsaritz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-10-23 13:43:43

"Emil Dotchevski" <emil_at_[hidden]> wrote in message 
news:AANLkTi=538M7U-njGg+jXZ75kLy7Qtx3_U+Nw_WOkr7d_at_mail.gmail.com...

> What's the benefit of function2 vs. adding a nothrow_t constructor to 
> function?

What's so different between adding more overloads to boost::function 
constructors and assignment operators and adding more defaulted template 
parameters?

How would you, for example, make a boost::function<> use a non-default SBO 
size or mark itself as nothrow using more runtime constructor parameters?

--
"What Huxley teaches is that in the age of advanced technology, spiritual
devastation is more likely to come from an enemy with a smiling face than
from one whose countenance exudes suspicion and hate."
Neil Postman