Zitat von Bob Walters <bob.s.walters@gmail.com>:
when the user needs to have control over code-on-retry etc., using the macros is not less verbose and the user has to be aware of the details that this is implemented as a loop and a try/catch block. having more than one choice on which macro to use even adds complexity.
Maybe you are right, may be not. All these depend on whether we found a good macro name for each common use case. I hope we will find out these common use cases and appropriated names together.
I agree with Steffan on this point.
I don't agree with me anymore ;) I still do in principle, but the macro has grown a little more complex in our discussion, to support "break", "return" and "continue" inside of user loops. so when you're weighing using a macro against writing a loop yourself it is now more tilted towards using a macro, so maybe we should support something like BOOST_TRANSACT_ON_RETRY. control ctrl; while(true){ try{ transaction tx; commit_on_destruction destr(tx); try{ do{ ctrl=break_; //...user code if(something) break; else if(something_else) continue; else return 5; //...end user code ctrl=none; break; }while((ctrl=continue_),false); }catch(...){ destr.nullify(); throw; } break; }catch(isolation_exception &){} }; if(ctrl==continue_) continue; else if(ctrl==break_) break;