Boost logo

Boost :

From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-07-07 16:10:53

On 07/07/2020 16:37, Alexander Grund via Boost wrote:
> Am 07.07.20 um 17:19 schrieb Niall Douglas via Boost:
>> On 07/07/2020 16:05, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
>>> Niall Douglas wrote:
>>>> We discussed whether adding an alternative naming for copy_exception()
>>>> could be called a major change.
>>> It is both major (API change) and potentially breaking (code that
>>> already defines its own make_exception_ptr may break).
> The commit in question is
> From API change view it conditionally removes a function from the detail
> namespace with no effect for the upcoming release.
> In the case BOOST_NO_EXCEPTIONS is defined it replaces an include of
> "boost/exception_ptr.hpp" with a forward declaration of that class.
> From what I understood "boost/exception_ptr.hpp" cannot be included when
> BOOST_NO_EXCEPTIONS is defined or compilation will fail.
> Hence I conclude that this is a pure bugfix (things compile that did not
> before) with no API or breaking change. As bugfix commits are still
> allowed according to the review schedule this is fine.
> Or am I missing anything?

Yes, I think Peter's issue is with the commit to Boost.Exception, not to


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at