Subject: Re: [boost] Domagoj Saric: "Re: [function] invoking without requiring boost::throw_exception"
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-09-06 20:27:46
On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Peter Myerscough-Jackopson
<peter.myerscough-jackopson_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> As others have noted, a common idiom for using a boost function object is to check if it is non-empty prior to calling it, is it an unreasonable extension to add this call? I am aware TR1 has subsumed “function” and so it is probably not possible remove the if-clause, but adding an unchecked invoke has significant benefits, [unchecked_invoke(), might be a better name than purely invoke()].
>
+1
-- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com