Le 08/10/11 22:46, Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. a écrit :
On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 1:34 PM, Beman Dawes<bdawes@acm.org> wrote:
Since Boost already has BOOST_NO_NOEXCEPT and at least one compiler (GCC) supports C++11 noexcept, I'd like to start using it in Boost code.
So how about a<boost/detail/noexcept.hpp> header with the usual boilerplate and this:
#ifndef BOOST_NO_NOEXCEPT # define BOOST_NOEXCEPT # define BOOST_NOEXCEPT_IF(Predicate) #else # define BOOST_NOEXCEPT no_except # define BOOST_NOEXCEPT_IF(Predicate) no_except(Predicate) #endif
As was pointed out in a previous thread, there isn't any reliable C++03 alternative for either of these two, so nothing is attempted, and that's OK in C++03 code.
We could also define BOOST_NOEXCEPT_OPERATOR(Predicate), and have it fall back to true in C++03 code. I'm not expert enough to know if that is reliable or even useful, so am not proposing it.
Comments?
No substantive comments at the moment, I just want to check spelling: "noexcept" or "no_except"? I had thought it was the former; your macro definitions suggest the latter.
Good idea. I would prefer if these macros are added to Boost.Config, documented and in file boost/config/suffix.hpp. Yes, the macros should be # define BOOST_NOEXCEPT noexcept # define BOOST_NOEXCEPT_IF(Predicate) noexcept(Predicate) Could you provide a patch? Best, Vicente