Re: [boost] Proposed new RAII Library

Subject: Re: [boost] Proposed new RAII Library
From: Andrew Sandoval (sandoval_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-09-14 21:13:51

Andrey Semashev <andrey.semashev <at> gmail.com> writes:

> The probability of exception doesn't matter. Scope guards (or RAIIFunction) 
> are typically used to implement exception safety, so introducing the 
> possibility of exception from the scope guard itself sort of defeats its 
> purpose. At the very least, it will complicate usage - probably, more than it 
> will simplify one. IMHO, this tool should not be based on boost/std::function.
> 

I knew someone would say that about the possibility of exceptions.  Again, I
would argue that the other class doesn't have that problem and is a better fit
for most things, but I don't see anyway your going to get std::tr1::function
functionality without allocations and the risk of an exception -- unless it is
implemented so that an exception can't be thrown.

I disagree completely about it defeating the purpose.  You can find something
less than perfect in just about every library, but that doesn't mean they
aren't tremendously useful.

Again though, a collection of RAII wrapper classes is what I'm proposing.  And
the great thing about having them in Boost, besides the fact that I don't have
to re-write them over and over, is that all of the caveats can be well
documented, as they are in other libraries.

Are we making any progress here?  I don't think I'm alone in seeing the value of
RAII classes and promoting the practice.

Thanks.

-Andrew Sandoval