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: 2011-03-25 21:58:07

On Fri 3/25/2011 8:51 PM, Emil Dotchevski wrote:

> First, let's get on the same page about the nature of the cost of
> BOOST_THROW_EXCEPTION:
>
> - It adds ~500 lines of C++ code, increasing your compile times.
> Compare this to something as basic as boost/config.hpp, which
> preprocesses to ~47000 lines on my system.

What does that have to do with anything?  I mean, depending on what they contain, 500 lines is certainly enough that they *could* have a major effect on code size or compile times, but I didn't attempt to measure that or make any claims along those lines.  What I did measure is runtime CPU overhead in a simple throw/catch scenario.  The impact BOOST_THROW_EXCEPTION does or doesn't have on compile time and code size doesn't change that.

> Second, consider that this is only the default behavior. All this
> functionality disappears if you #define BOOST_EXCEPTION_DISABLE.

Huh?  But that changes the behavior of the code, breaking it in places that depend on exceptions.

I no longer understand where this exchange is going and, not being a decision-maker, it's not clear to me whether/how I can help move this issue to resolution.  I presented a concern I had about a proposed change and the findings from my attempts to quantify one such scenario.  I can clean up & submit my test program (a tiny thing, really), if others are having difficulty reproducing my results.

Matt