Re: [scope] The comparison with Boost.ScopeExit is unfair

From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2023-12-02 17:37:16

On 12/2/23 19:39, Andrzej Krzemienski wrote:
> 
> I would encourage you to add a third row.
> I understand that "Introduction" is only to give a potential user the
> first impression, and this is exactly why I am pushing for this. The
> current presentation has two downsides:
> * It presents Boost.ScopeExit as worse than it really is.
> * It might give an impression that the author is unaware of
> coroutine/fiber-related problems, and offers no solution for this case.

I will think about it. I'm not sure the same use case needs to be
duplicated, though. Maybe I can add a set of examples that demonstrate
delayed activation of the scope guard (which would involve a flag in
case of Boost.ScopeExit).

https://github.com/Lastique/scope/issues/13