Re: [boost] [modularization] Dependency to Boost.Exceptionunavoidable?

Subject: Re: [boost] [modularization] Dependency to Boost.Exceptionunavoidable?
From: Ahmed Charles (acharles_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-11-04 03:53:09

What about combining throw_exception.hpp and exception.hpp and move that header to config, since it won't depend on anything else and only really does configuration anyways? Note, if you don't like config as a choice, the new version of detail which only depends on config sounds nice as well.
________________________________
From: Emil Dotchevski
Sent: 11/3/2013 12:29 PM
To: boost_at_[hidden]
Subject: Re: [boost] [modularization] Dependency to Boost.Exceptionunavoidable?

On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 5:19 PM, Niall Douglas <s_sourceforge_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On 1 Nov 2013 at 16:01, Emil Dotchevski wrote:
>
>> 1. If BOOST_NO_EXCEPTIONS is defined, libraries should not throw. One
>> option to implement that behavior is to pass exception objects (of the
>> usual documented library-defined types) to boost::throw_exception.
>
> I wonder how useful supporting exceptions disabled is in recent years?

I agree that many Boost libraries are impractical with exception
handling disabled, but there is no harm done in supporting
BOOST_NO_EXCEPTIONS via boost::throw_exception, since its
specification does not allow it to return.

--
Emil Dotchevski
Reverge Studios, Inc.
http://www.revergestudios.com/reblog/index.php?n=ReCode
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost