Re: [boost] Do we need a boost_exception class or idiom?

[Beman Dawes]

At 01:20 PM 11/20/2002, Fernando Cacciola wrote:

>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

My naive expectation would be to call abort() if not wishing to handle exceptions, but that really is a side issue. The bigger issue is whether or not Boost should have a usual way of defining error exceptions thrown by Boost libraries, with raise() being one of the issues to be dealt with.

> }
>
>and that boost libraries throw such exceptions *only* by calling .raise():
>i.e. never with a throw expression directly in the user code.

I'm not sure if what we need is a class, a concept, or just some documentation.

But it does seem that individual Boosters have figured out (presumably better) ways to handle some aspects of reporting error exceptions. Would anyone be interested in trying to refine that vague feeling into something specific?

--Beman


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