On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba <vicente.botet@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
So resuming, the boost::scope_guard (without a dismiss state) is a convenient abstraction for c++11 compilers supporting lambdas, and Boost.ScopeExit reflects the same abstraction for C++03.
I will be for an extension of Boost.ScopeExit that provides a non-macro interface, like the one of the preceding scope_guard, for the people that don't need to make their code portable to non c++11 compilers. I will name it however scoped_exit.
Extracted from the Boost.ScopeExit
struct scope_exit { scope_exit(std::function<void (void)> f) : f_(f) {} ~scope_exit(void) { f_(); } private: std::function<void (void)> f_; };
void world::add_person(person const& a_person) { bool commit = false; persons_.push_back(a_person); scope_exit on_exit1([&commit, this](void) { // Use C++11 lambda. if(!commit) persons_.pop_back(); // `persons_` via captured `this`. }); // ... commit = true; } Sure if there's enough interest I can move this scope_exit class from the examples into the Scope Exit lib itself when #ifndef BOOST_NO_LAMBDAS. My _personal_ opinion is that such a boost::scope_exit class is so trivial that programmers can just program it themselves, but that's just my opinion and I'm happy to add such a feature (or better to move it into the lib from the examples) if Boosters want it. No review should be needed, I can just post the (trivial) changes on this ML and confirm them with Alexander Nasonov. Thanks. --Lorenzo