Re: [Capy review] Some questions
Ruben Perez via Boost <[email protected]> Tue, 23 Jun 2026 20:07:02 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CACR-mdK9a2oT7eG9ECfz3Y=BKOr8UK_DBPHOWpG6AirDF_x_qQ@mail.gmail.com> |
> > > > 4) Does capy::cond::canceled add anything vs. just using > > > > std::errc::operation_canceled? > > > > > > No, it doesn't. It is there for consistency with our error types that > don't have std spellings. > > > > Would it make sense to just use the errc one and remove capy's? Maybe > > Peter can suggest something here? > > We have a convention throughout the project to always compare against > error conditions. Making a change like that would make it the oddball. Why? std::errc is an error condition enum, not an error code enum. _______________________________________________ Boost mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] https://lists.boost.org/mailman3/lists/boost.lists.boost.org/ Archived at: https://lists.boost.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/RA77CLUBCMH5IILPRHQWM3OLCVRHSK7W/