From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-06-27 05:57:53
On 6/26/19 7:03 PM, David Sankel via Boost wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 8:42 AM Andrzej Krzemienski via Boost <
> boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> wt., 16 kwi 2019 o 23:57 Richard Hodges via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>
>>> Are there real-world examples of well-designed classes who's move
>>> assignment operators throw?
From time to time I think about this. Is swap guarenteed not to throw?
Or is this the same question.
The real question is what should mother of variants policy look like and
what traits on the types need to be supported. The more I think about
this and see it come up again, again and again, I'm thinking that it was
a mistake not to pursue this from the beginning. It's the only way the
discussion can ever be resolved.
I still undecided on whether the catchy name was the best choice. On
one hand - it's catchy and descriptive and memorable. It also provokes
curiosity on the part of those who might not otherwise look at it. On
the other hand, it suggests that it's a joke - which admitadly was how
it started, but now it's turned into something serious. Sort of like my
whole life I guess.
I'm sort of surprised that no one has taken of the challenge of making
all current variants std, boost, ... obsolete. Where are the young
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk