Re: [boost] Boost and exceptions

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost and exceptions
From: Nevin Liber (nevin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-06-21 19:05:41

On 20 June 2012 19:19, Robert Ramey <ramey_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> > Here's the *real* situation:  Welcome to software development.
>
> True - it's bad enough already - So let's agree not to make it worse
> if we can avoid it.
>

Define "worse".  There are multiple conflicting goals.  As I pointed out
from the FAQ:

"Many of the Boost libraries are actively maintained and improved, so
backward compatibility with prior version isn't always possible."

> "It's not going to be perfect anyway, so don't sweat the small stuff"
>

Of course we should strive for perfection (even if we can't achieve it),
and sweat the small stuff.

Now define "perfection".  Perfection != 100% backwards compatible.   As I
said before: "While the bar on changing functionality and/or interfaces is
high, it isn't (and never has been, as far as I know) absolute (and it
isn't even as high as the C++ standard, nor should it be)."

Good practices can reduce (but not eliminate) accidental risk., but ultimately,
one has to balance risk of breakage vs. enhancement value.
-- 
 Nevin ":-)" Liber  <mailto:nevin_at_[hidden]>  [phone]