From: Eric Woodruff (Eric.Woodruff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-13 13:06:26
Well,
Assuming the internal exception mechanism destructs an object that was caught as a reference afterwards, there would be a problem in holding onto the std::exception&.
I'm sure the other guru's here can come up with a solution...
----- Original Message -----
From: Eric Woodruff
Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel
Sent: Tuesday, 2002:August:13 1:49 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: AttemptingresolutionofThreads&ExceptionsIssue
You would either:
1) specify std::exception& because you want to use the abstract interface
2) specify your error class
where it would store either:
1) an std::exception& which would have a reference to your error type
2) an instance of your error class (copy constructed)
----- Original Message -----
From: David Abrahams
Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel
Sent: Tuesday, 2002:August:13 1:10 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Attempting resolutionofThreads&ExceptionsIssue
From: "Eric Woodruff" <Eric.Woodruff_at_[hidden]>
> Could the user not specify std::exception& instead?
Suppose they do.
Now suppose I define and throw my own exception type:
struct error : std::exception { char const* what() throw(); double
x[3000]; };
How is the exception-rethrowing mechanism going to store that?
-----------------------------------------------------------
David Abrahams * Boost Consulting
dave_at_[hidden] * http://www.boost-consulting.com
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes:
http://listarchives.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://listarchives.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost