Re: [boost] [function] function wrapping with no exception safety guarantee

David Abrahams wrote:

Is *that* the core issue here? Because it seems like the issue has been about various other things earlier in this conversation.

The core issue, if I remember correctly, is that when a library uses boost::function internally without ever calling it while NULL and the user compiles with exceptions disabled, he needs to supply a definition of boost::throw_exception even though it will never be called.