Re: [boost] Formal Review Request: TypeErasure

Subject: Re: [boost] Formal Review Request: TypeErasure
From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-06-30 18:20:40

AMDG

On 05/29/2012 03:04 AM, Dave Abrahams wrote:
> 
> on Tue May 22 2012, Steven Watanabe <watanabesj-AT-gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>>
>> Online documentation can be found here:
>> http://steven_watanabe.users.sourceforge.net/type_erasure/libs/type_erasure/
> 
> http://steven_watanabe.users.sourceforge.net/type_erasure/libs/type_erasure/doc/html/boost_typeerasure/multi.html
> says:
> 
>   The types of the arguments must match or the behavior is undefined.
> 
> I presume you mean that the dynamic, erased types must match?
> (presumably you could easily prevent the use of different static types at
> compile-time).  IMO it's crucial that you be rigorous about these
> distinctions in your documentation.
> 

I've tried to clarify this.

> I wonder if undefined behavior is really the best possible choice here.
> I honestly don't know what's most useful.  Do you have a rationale for
> your choice?
> 

It's impossible to enforce this statically,
so the only alternative is to throw an
exception.  I do provide a mode that does
this.  By default the library assumes that
you've made sure that the types match.
If you add relaxed_match, it will check
whether the arguments match and if they
don't, either fall back on some reasonable
default behavior or throw.

In Christ,
Steven Watanabe