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

Subject: Re: [boost] [inspect] exceptions (FW: [Boost-users] no exceptions)
From: Gruenke, Matt (mgruenke_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-03-23 16:47:41

I use exceptions, but I'm also sympathetic to those who can't use or don't want them.  I'm skeptical that all libraries can or should be designed to work without exceptions.
 
Would it be possible to simply specify which libraries support exception-free operation, in a fashion similar to how certain libraries are called out as header-only?  There's a potentially further distinction between libraries which propagate exceptions to the caller and those which only require them internally.
 
Whatever arguments there are for using BOOST_THROW_EXCEPTION() vs. throw, that seems a somewhat independent matter.  Simply making this substitution does not guarantee that the library will work properly with exceptions disabled, and there might be legitimate reasons for libraries not designed to operate without exceptions use throw.
 
IMO, separating these issues & potentially litigating them on a case-by-case basis could make this more tractable.
 
 
Matt
 

________________________________

From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] on behalf of Dave Abrahams
Sent: Wed 3/23/2011 12:55 PM
To: boost_at_[hidden]
Subject: Re: [boost] [inspect] exceptions (FW: [Boost-users] no exceptions)

On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 12:07 AM, Emil Dotchevski
<emildotchevski_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 11:37 PM, Dave Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> At Tue, 22 Mar 2011 11:38:59 +0300,
>> Vladimir Prus wrote:

>> but the more I think about it, the less clear I am on what that means.
>> Would we be asking people to try to recover from out-of-memory and
>> other exceptional conditions via some other mechanism when exceptions
>> are disabled?  That seems impractical to me.  We could barely even use
>> the standard library under those circumstances.  What do people who
>> turn off exceptions expect from their libraries?
>
> What they expect is beyond our control, but this is what we require:
> http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/release/libs/exception/doc/throw_exception.html.

That does not look like a requirement on Boost library authors to me,
so it makes me wonder about its relevance.