Re: [Capy review] Some questions

Steve Gerbino wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 23rd, 2026 at 8:08 PM, Ruben Perez via Boost
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > > > > > 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.
> 
> To clarify, I mean our error conditions as indicated here:
> https://develop.capy.cpp.al/capy/reference/boost/capy/cond.html
> 
> "These are the conditions callers should compare against when handling errors
> from capy operations."

Even if you keep capy::cond::canceled, you should still make sure
that comparing against std::errc::operation_canceled works (compares
equal whenever comparing to cond::cancelled returns true.)

And this also applies to any other conditions that have standard
equivalents.


_______________________________________________
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/TZ6W3JAXA47ENKJXH7RBENSKMZHXJ5P3/