Re: [boost] [Stacktrace] review

Subject: Re: [boost] [Stacktrace] review
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-12-16 14:16:42

On 12/16/16 11:05 AM, Niall Douglas wrote:
> Option 1: That Stacktrace implement a macro like
> BOOST_STACKTRACE_THROW_EXCEPTION() which reimplements
> BOOST_THROW_EXCEPTION() but with muxed in stacktrace.
>
> Option 2: That Stacktrace optionally hook some compile time hook in
> Boost.Exception to mux in stacktrace.
>
> Option 3: That Stacktrace optionally hook some runtime hook in
> Boost.Exception to mux in stacktrace.

Option 3:

My suggestion was to ignore the whole issue and assign it some other 
library/component.  A couple libraries use the idiom similar to

template MyTemplate<class T some_type, class E error_handler = 
boost::throw_exception>

This decouples the error handling from the functionality of the library 
itself and permits the user to unificate his error handling across 
libraries.  It also avoids the necessity of coordinating error handling 
across libraries in time and space.  In this particular case stacktrace 
would provide the mechanism to invoke/serialization or whatever a stack 
trace and it would be job of the library/application which uses it to 
decide when to invoke it.

Robert Ramey