On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Daniel Pfeifer
I was referring to
. This should not be needed when BOOST_NO_EXCEPTIONS is defined, as throw_exception takes std::exception, not boost::exception.
That is not necessarily true. These two defines have the following semantics: 1. If BOOST_NO_EXCEPTIONS is defined, libraries should not throw. One option to implement that behavior is to pass exception objects (of the usual documented library-defined types) to boost::throw_exception. This imposes a requirement that the exception types must derive from std::exception, but does NOT mean that they can't use the Boost Exception library. 2. If BOOST_EXCEPTION_DISABLE is defined, then boost::throw_exception does not inject the boost::exception class as a base. This prevents boost/exception/exception.hpp from being included. However that header does not include *any* headers, so the benefits in terms of dependencies are mostly theoretical. -- Emil Dotchevski Reverge Studios, Inc. http://www.revergestudios.com/reblog/index.php?n=ReCode