24 Mar
2011
24 Mar
'11
2:49 a.m.
AMDG On 03/23/2011 07:32 PM, Vicente BOTET wrote:
OK, but you're speaking about the motivation for development of BOOST_THROW_EXCEPTION. I'm speaking about the motivation to make using BOOST_THROW_EXCEPTION a guideline. Supporting non-conforming compilers is definitely not in the focus of Boost guidelines ("There is no requirement that a library run on C++ compilers which do not conform to the ISO standard.") Note that people working on embedded systems could be using a conforming compiler but they could decide to disable exceptions as the performances could be improved, let me say by 15%. 15% that they absolutely need.
The fact that non-conformance is intentional does not make it conforming. In Christ, Steven Watanabe