Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [hash][array][stacktrace][type_index] Adding noexcept to hash
From: Daniel James (dnljms_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-12-04 08:57:24


On 4 December 2017 at 06:54, Richard Hodges via Boost
<boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Adding a noexcept specification (i.e. making an interface more restrictive)
> sounds like a breaking change to me. Although it's the correct thing to do,
> surely anyone who has an override of hash_range in their code will be
> affected?

It isn't a member function, so there's no way to override it. The
customization point is a call to hash_value via argument dependent
lookup. The noexcept specifiers are going to be conditional on whether
the iterators and hash functions are noexcept, so if an overload
doesn't have a noexcept specification, then hash_range for that value
is going to be effectively noexcept(false) and will still be
compatible.


Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk