From: Jesse Jones (jesjones_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-12-10 18:06:39
>>If I'm doing a cast that should *never* fail then I don't want to
>>throw. All that will do is bloat my exe with extra entries in the
>>exception tables and screw over the optimizer.
>
>In which case, I think the macro check I posted is the tool for the job,
>and not a raw numeric_cast.
It seems I shot my mouth off without reading the code you posted
carefully enough. I agree that something like that would solve my
problem. Actually now that I think about it an even classier way to
handle this is with an overload that has a nothrow_t as the second
argument. Although this would be a bit ugly to do now with the way the
code is factored...
-- Jesse