Subject: Re: [boost] [c++1] BOOST_NOEXCEPT macros?
From: John Maddock (boost.regex_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-10-09 04:09:31
>> So how about a<boost/detail/noexcept.hpp> header with the usual
>> boilerplate and this:
>> #ifndef BOOST_NO_NOEXCEPT
>> # define BOOST_NOEXCEPT
>> # define BOOST_NOEXCEPT_IF(Predicate)
>> # define BOOST_NOEXCEPT no_except
>> # define BOOST_NOEXCEPT_IF(Predicate) no_except(Predicate)
>> As was pointed out in a previous thread, there isn't any reliable
>> C++03 alternative for either of these two, so nothing is attempted,
>> and that's OK in C++03 code.
>> We could also define BOOST_NOEXCEPT_OPERATOR(Predicate), and have it
>> fall back to true in C++03 code. I'm not expert enough to know if that
>> is reliable or even useful, so am not proposing it.
> No substantive comments at the moment, I just want to check spelling:
> "noexcept" or "no_except"? I had thought it was the former; your macro
> definitions suggest the latter.
>Good idea. I would prefer if these macros are added to Boost.Config,
>documented and in file boost/config/suffix.hpp.
That would be my idea too: add them to config/suffix.hpp and document them
as part of Boost.Config's "Helper macros".
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk