Boost logo

Boost :

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2021-02-02 18:07:47

Alexander Grund wrote:

> I just checked that and yes, the setup is the same and yes tests pass.
> Surprised by that I checked the difference: The destructor is implemented
> in the cpp file (in fact the whole class is, which is why
DECL is the right choice here).


> So IMO conclusion is: Mark exception classes faced at users at least
> VISIBLE and test with libc++.

The conclusion based on this data is rather, use VISIBLE instead of DECL for
exception classes implemented entirely in the header. Which is intuitively
the right thing to do anyway, as there's nothing to import or export.

So it seems that the fault indeed lies in the library rather than in our
definition of the macros.

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