Subject: Re: [boost] [outcome] High level summary of review feedback accepted so far
From: Andrzej Krzemienski (akrzemi1_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-05-30 19:37:19
2017-05-30 2:54 GMT+02:00 Peter Dimov via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>:
> Vicente J. Botet Escriba wrote:
> Who prefers error() to throw if there is a value?
I do not have a strong opinion. If I will ever call it, I will make sure
that the error code is there, so whatever you choose, will work for me. But
just to remind everyone. We are not talking about an ordinaty throw here.
It will be something like BOOST_THROW_EXCEPTION: it will throw on platforms
with execeptions. On others it may abort().
> I do.
> I honestly don't understand the affection for undefined behavior. Not in
> principle, and not in this specific case.
People who argue in favour of narrow contracts want narrow contracts -- not
UB. A narrow contract tells under what circumstances is it correct to call
a given function. Narrow contracts in library interface do not introduce
UB. Library users introduce UB when they use a library incorrectly. You
cannot prevent users form using a library incorrectly. You may try to work
around their incorrect usages, but it is not obviously superior a solution.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk