From: Beman Dawes (beman_at_[hidden])
Date: 1999-07-10 08:25:56
At 08:31 PM 7/9/99 -0400, Dave Abrahams wrote:
>> Also, the sentence "For functions which can throw std::bad_alloc,
empty
>> throw specifiers are not supplied." is confusing. Of course empty
>> throw specifiers woundn't be supplied.
>
>I think I made this argument earlier, but it didn't make it into the
docs.
My fault. I should have changed it when Dave originally mentioned
it. I have now removed the word "empty".
But that it just a patch; the real need is do rewrite the whole
paragraph, and I don't feel I understand enough to do that yet.
Maybe if someone summarizes these discussions...
--Beman
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/boost
http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications