On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 7:56 AM, Sohail Somani <sohail@taggedtype.net> wrote:
On 14/09/2012 9:22 AM, Andrey Semashev wrote:
On Friday 14 September 2012 09:07:07 Sohail Somani wrote:
On 14/09/2012 1:36 AM, Andrey Semashev wrote:
Actually, there's this procedure:
http://www.boost.org/development/submissions.html
Specifically, a formal review is required before the library can be committed. Also, the library author should probably read this:
My view is that it's a missing feature in the existing Scope Exit library.
I don't think so. I've been using Boost.ScopeExit for quite a while and don't really miss the scope guard function (like the proposed RAIIFunction). If it is proposed it has to provide something remarkably different or benefical, IMHO.
As for the RAII wrapper, this component may well deserve its own mini-library.
A proposed library should be more than a tweak on an existing idea that fits just fine with an existing library. BOOST_SCOPE_EXIT is way overkill for simple handle closing or transaction commit operations:
BOOST_SCOPE_EXIT( (&handle) ) { CloseHandle(handle); }
vs
boost::scope_exit OMGINEEDANAME(CloseHandle,handle);
I'd even be OK with:
BOOST_SCOPE_EXIT(CloseHandle,handle);
Please consider programming: #define UNARY_SCOPE_EXIT(unary_func, arg) \ BOOST_SCOPE_EXIT( (&arg) ) { \ unary_func(arg); \ } BOOST_SCOPE_EXIT_END And then: UNARY_SCOPE_EXIT(CloseHandle, handle); That way the code for this one specialized use case of Scope Exit becomes closer to what your expressed preference is. You can of course put this macro #definition into your own little lib scope_exit_arity.hpp and re-use it across your different projects :)
Too many curly braces in my code already. I need more :: and BOOST_*
HTH, --Lorenzo