Boost logo

Boost-Commit :

From: dave_at_[hidden]
Date: 2008-07-30 16:02:01

Author: dave
Date: 2008-07-30 16:02:01 EDT (Wed, 30 Jul 2008)
New Revision: 47897

Fix a couple of typo/edit-os pointed out by Grégory Pakosz. Thanks!

Text files modified:
   website/public_html/live/community/exception_safety.html | 4 ++--
   1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Modified: website/public_html/live/community/exception_safety.html
--- website/public_html/live/community/exception_safety.html (original)
+++ website/public_html/live/community/exception_safety.html 2008-07-30 16:02:01 EDT (Wed, 30 Jul 2008)
@@ -138,7 +138,7 @@
               devote a single instruction cycle to dealing with exceptions
               until one is thrown, and then it can be handled at a speed
               comparable with that of calling a function <a title=
- "D. R. Musser, &ldquo;Introspective Sorting and Selection Algorithms&rdquo;, Software-Practice and Experience 27(8):983-993, 1997."
+ "Bjarne Stroustrup, The Design And Evolution of C++. Addison Wesley, Reading, MA, 1995, ISBN 0-201-54330-3, Section 16.9.1."
               href="#reference7"><sup>[7]</sup></a>. That alone gives
               programs using exceptions performance equivalent to that of a
               program which ignores the possibility of errors. Using
@@ -241,7 +241,7 @@
               stack-unwinding. This guarantee is actually less useful than it
               might at first appear. If a component has many valid states,
               after an exception we have no idea what state the component is
- in|only that the state is valid. The options for recovery in
+ in; only that the state is valid. The options for recovery in
               this case are limited: either destruction or resetting the
               component to some known state before further use. Consider the
               following example:</p>

Boost-Commit list run by bdawes at, david.abrahams at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at