On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 7:53 PM, Robert Ramey
I think that there has been a lot of confusion about what BOOST_THROW_EXCEPTION is suppose to do.
My understanding was that it was a macro intended to support the writing of portable code that could run on platforms which didn't support exceptions or where the user / author didn't want to use the exception mechanism so he could redefine the macro. Lot's of libraries used this idiom to decouple their libraries from the the selection of exception mechanism.
I admit that my usage of BOOST_THROW_EXCEPTION is fairly recent, but that use case is not even mentioned: http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_62_0/libs/exception/doc/BOOST_THROW_EXCEPTIO... What I want from BOOST_THROW_EXCEPTION is to embed the current source file, line number and function name in the thrown exception -- which is the closest I can get to a "stack trace" with current portable facilities.
Now it's being suggested that BOOST_THROW_EXCEPTION be repurposed/enhanced yet again?
I suggested that there is potential for integration between (the proposed) Boost.Stacktrace and Boost.Exception. I'm flexible about exactly what form that integration will take. I rather like Emil's suggestion of embedding the stacktrace from within boost::throw_exception, since it can do that. It need not happen within the BOOST_THROW_EXCEPTION macro.