Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost and exceptions
From: Agustín K-ballo Bergé (kaballo86_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-06-23 18:52:23

On 23/06/2012 20:33, Robert Ramey wrote:
> But this facility is included in the same library as another facility
> useful to users. So addressing of one problem - non-conforming
> compilers is not orthogonal to the other problem - helpful facilities
> for users. It's not fine grained enough for my taste.

At that we agree, I never use the arbitrary data transport facilities of
Boost.Exception myself when I write library code. I think of that
facility as a end-user only kind of facility, but its still nice that
the users of my library can leverage it if they want to (and I do use it
when I myself am the user of my library). I wouldn't know if its either
possible or sensible to implement the two features as separate
components, perhaps its something worth researching.

Regarding the overhead payed for something that I may not want to use,
according to Boost.Exception documentation is negligible. For me
negligible its usually too much, but if we are talking exceptions then
we are talking about exceptional situations (yes, I'm one of those
purists). The documentation for the library states:

     The cost of this integration is:
      - In terms of space: a pointer and 3 ints are added to the static
size of exception objects.
      - In terms of speed: the pointer is initialized to null at the
point of the throw.
      - In terms of coupling: about 400 self-contained lines of C++ with
no external includes.

. It's placed as an answer to "Why is boost::exception integrated in
boost::throw_exception?" rather than "What is the space overhead of the
boost::exception base class?" which is a bit unfortunate. I don't see
html anchors to each of the questions either, sorry about that.

Agustín K-ballo Bergé.-

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at