Well,

Assuming the internal exception mechanism destructs an object that was caught as a reference afterwards, there would be a problem in holding onto the std::exception&.

I'm sure the other guru's here can come up with a solution...

----- Original Message -----

From: Eric Woodruff

Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel

Sent: Tuesday, 2002:August:13 1:49 PM

Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: AttemptingresolutionofThreads&ExceptionsIssue

You would either:

1) specify std::exception& because you want to use the abstract interface
2) specify your error class

where it would store either:

1) an std::exception& which would have a reference to your error type
2) an instance of your error class (copy constructed)

----- Original Message -----
From: David Abrahams
Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel
Sent: Tuesday, 2002:August:13 1:10 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Attempting resolutionofThreads&ExceptionsIssue

From: "Eric Woodruff" <Eric.Woodruff@falsetto.com>

> Could the user not specify std::exception& instead?

Suppose they do.
Now suppose I define and throw my own exception type:

struct error : std::exception { char const* what() throw(); double
x[3000]; };

How is the exception-rethrowing mechanism going to store that?

-----------------------------------------------------------
David Abrahams * Boost Consulting
dave@boost-consulting.com * http://www.boost-consulting.com

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes:
http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost