Re: [boost] [function] function wrapping with no exception safetyguarantee

Daniel Walker wrote:

But the coupling with Boost.Exception is only there to implement the strong exception safety guarantee of operator().

Your terminology is wrong. Both variants of operator() have the same exception safety; and even if they didn't, nobody uses "strong exception safety" to mean "throws an exception when such-and-so". The issue is not coupling with Boost.Exception, the issue is that the user has to supply a definition of boost::throw_exception when exceptions are disabled. This was true before there were Boost.Exception.