Re: [boost] [inspect] exceptions (FW: [Boost-users] no exceptions)

Subject: Re: [boost] [inspect] exceptions (FW: [Boost-users] no exceptions)
From: Emil Dotchevski (emildotchevski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-03-22 15:10:09

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 1:38 AM, Vladimir Prus
<vladimir_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Emil Dotchevski wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 6:39 PM, Robert Kawulak
>> <robert.kawulak_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> >From Boost Users ML:
>>>
>>>> From: Hochhaus, Andrew
>>>> I would like to use boost with BOOST_NO_EXCEPTIONS [1] and the g++
>>>> -fno-exceptions flag. However, it appears that some spots in boost
>>>> library code:
>>>>
>>>> a) throw exceptions with the "raw" throw keyword [instead of
>>>> BOOST_THROW_EXCEPTION or boost::throw_exception]
>>>> b) use try ... catch blocks without "#ifnef BOOST_NO_EXCEPTIONS" guards
>>>
>>> Wouldn't it be a good idea to add checks for these to the inspect tool? Also, non-empty
>>> exception specifications are discouraged by Boost guidelines - should appropriate checks be
>>> added too?
>>
>> +1
>
> I don't think that Boost libraries are required to support non-conforming compilers or
> operation modes of compilers, therefore adding inspect check for a workaround for such
> non-comforming behaviour would be wrong, I think.

Why use BOOST_THROW_EXCEPTION to throw?

- Typically, there is no need to do anything else to support
BOOST_NO_EXCEPTIONS builds;

- Enables boost::exception_ptr, so the exceptions you throw can be
transported between threads;

- Enables boost::error_info, so users can attach stuff to exceptions.

- Enables better messages from boost::diagnostic_information.

Emil Dotchevski
Reverge Studios, Inc.
http://www.revergestudios.com/reblog/index.php?n=ReCode