From: John Maddock (boost.regex_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-10 06:12:32
> Do you plan to continue to support configurations/platforms lacking
> exceptions (through boost::throw_exception)?
Yes, absolutely, it should be using throw_exception rather than throw
anyway, but I'll double check.
> If so, what would the replacement to this be:
> #ifdef BOOST_REGEX_NON_RECURSIVE
> }
> catch(...)
> {
> // unwind all pushed states, apart from anything else this
> // ensures that all the states are correctly destructed
> // not just the memory freed.
> while(unwind(true)){}
> throw;
> }
> #endif
OK that's a bug :-) Needs replacing with a non-catching version (since we
can't unwind the stack anyway without exceptions).
Thanks,
John.