"Fernando Cacciola" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm not sure if a boost exception class is *needed*, but I see no problem in
> having one.
> Anyway, IIF such an exception class is defined, I *strongly* encourage (as I
> did in the past) that it provides:
>
> virtual void raise() const
> {
> #ifndef BOOST_NO_EXCEPTIONS
> throw *this ;
> #endif
> }
>
> and that boost libraries throw such exceptions *only* by calling .raise():
> i.e. never with a throw expression directly in the user code.
1. Why should this be a virtual function? The dynamic type of an
exception object is never used in a throw expression.
2. Why are we reinventing the wheel? What's wrong with
boost::throw_exception() from boost/throw_exception.hpp?
--
David Abrahams
[EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://www.boost-consulting.com
Boost support, enhancements, training, and commercial distribution
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
