From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-01 12:17:49
"Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> writes:
> Rob Stewart wrote:
>> From: Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]>
>>> Presumably then exists() and the is_x() functions would be specified
>>> in terms of status() and lstatus() results. So in effect exists()
>>> and the is_x() functions are conveniences, very useful in many but
>>> not all cases, and safe to use casually since obscure errors will
>>> cause exceptions.
>>
>> Sounds great to me!
>
> I find it very odd for exists/is_* predicates to throw exceptions... and
> even odder for this to be described as "safe to use casually" when casual
> use may lead to aborting an operation when this is not desirable and the
> exception does not imply failure.
I missed a lot of detail, but based on the little I know I have to
agree with Peter.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com