On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Robert Ramey <ramey@rrsd.com> wrote:
Fabio Fracassi wrote:
On 6/22/12 8:58 AM, Robert Ramey wrote:
The problem was the gratuitious inclusion of a new dependency. The extent/nature of any problem it created or didn't create is not relevant here.
Yes it is, because in reality boost exception solves problems for the users of any library that uses it. When using boost exception I can safely let exceptions escape threads and have them rethrown in the starting thread, for instance.
well, not every application uses threads. Really, I don't think anyone can say "solves problems for ANY library which uses it." without knowing what the application is.
This works the other way around too. A library developer, without knowing what the application is, shouldn't be preventing the user from using Boost Exception with the exceptions emitted by the library. When a library calls boost::throw_exception, this potentially solves problems for the USERS of the library (depending on the architecture of the application), even if the library itself doesn't benefit. Emil Dotchevski Reverge Studios, Inc. http://www.revergestudios.com/reblog/index.php?n=ReCode