Re: [scope] scope_fail is unimplementable

From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2023-04-14 10:00:18

On 4/14/23 09:39, Andrzej Krzemienski wrote:
> 
> niedz., 9 kwi 2023 o 03:11Â Andrey Semashev via Boost
> <boost_at_[hidden] <mailto:boost_at_[hidden]>> napisał(a):
> 
>     Yes, you can manually (de)activate the guard in small and contained
>     cases, but in general I would very much prefer it to work automatically.
>     Otherwise, it quickly becomes a maintenance nightmare that it was
>     supposed to fix.
> 
> True. Therefore in my code I would contain the code that requires a
> guard. (In general, I prefer RAII.)
> But even contained cases need a scope guard.
> 
> So, the trade-off is this:
> scope_fail:
> Â  - requires no manual deactivate
> 
> scope_guard with deactivate():
> Â  - works uniformly and unsurprisingly in all contexts, including coroutines
> Â  - is fast.
> 
> I would recommend that this trade-off is documented.

Yes, that makes sense. I will update the docs.