Subject: Re: [boost] New libraries implementing C++11 features in C++03
From: Stewart, Robert (Robert.Stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-12-01 13:36:04
Dean Michael Berris wrote:
> If the only thing a library
> has is "prettier error messages when things are broken" then it's a
> great library for broken code -- which makes that advantage null and
> void because IT'S NOT AN ADVANTAGE BECAUSE YOUR CODE DOESN'T COMPILE.
> Am I not getting through here?
> Whoever loved a library that looked great when your code fails to
> compile? This is CRAZY TALK.
Since errors are inevitable, libraries that trigger readily understood errors when misused are preferable to those that trigger painful error messages, all else being equal. Sometimes, enduring the error message pain is worthwhile because of other factors such as performance or additional, desirable functionality. Discussing error messages to which a library is prone when used erroneously, it decidedly not crazy.
Rob Stewart robert.stewart_at_[hidden]
Software Engineer using std::disclaimer;
Dev Tools & Components
Susquehanna International Group, LLP http://www.sig.com
IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk