Re: [boost] [interprocess] why not use boost/system/error_code?

Subject: Re: [boost] [interprocess] why not use boost/system/error_code?
From: Ion Gaztañaga (igaztanaga_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-11-26 10:17:05

On 26/11/2010 1:28, Beman Dawes wrote:
> 2010/11/25 Ion Gaztañaga<igaztanaga_at_[hidden]>:
>> On 25/11/2010 6:39, Christian Holmquist wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Is there any reason to have an own error code wrapper in
>>> boost::interprocess/errors.hpp, instead of using
>>> boost::system::error_code?
>>
>> Because interprocess was developed before system. There is plan to adapt it
>> in the future, but we need to maintain some backwards compatibility.
>
> Also, the final C++0x standard is due to be voted out in mid-March,
> and Boost.System in effect becomes part of the standard library. While
> there won't be much change in the WP between now and March, a few
> details may well change. My plan is to do a pass through Boost.System
> then, and bring it as close to the standard as possible, including
> ifdef use of C++0x features. After that might be the best time for Ion
> and other Boost developers thinking about changing code to use
> Boost.System.

Thanks Beman. At that time, I think I will need some guidelines to know 
which errors should be redirected to Boost.System exceptions and which 
should be thrown as library errors. For instance, a shared memory could 
be implemented as mapped files in some systems and with native shared 
memory in others, but an Interprocess user might want to have some 
unified error system to maintain portability. I guess Filesystem and 
Asio have already paved the way.

Ion