Re: [boost] Reforming Boost.System and <system_error> round 2

Subject: Re: [boost] Reforming Boost.System and <system_error> round 2
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-01-16 19:00:37

> For the record, I was thinking of (and testing) a different
> implementation that does not involve the `failed` call. Instead, I
> changed the `error_code` constructors:

I feel no love for this design. What I want to do is construct an error
code from some C error code returned to me without additional logic. I
should not need to know whether the C error code is success or failure.

You've got to think of the many cases where we wrap C libraries like
SQLite and we want to encapsulate its error/status coding system into
C++ with semantic understanding of what those codes mean. So,
specifically, their mapping onto std::errc, and their
success/failure/warning meanings.

Niall

-- 
ned Productions Limited Consulting
http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/