Boost logo

Boost :

From: Beman Dawes (beman_at_[hidden])
Date: 1999-09-02 10:08:25

postmast.root.admi.gov_at_[hidden] wrote:

>... Seems about as
>safe as static_cast, only it happens to be checked during debugging
>(only). Safe to me implies what dynamic_cast provides, and nothing
>less. Perhaps debug_static_cast (or something along those lines)
>be clearer?

After I sent the message using the "safe_downcast" name, I remembered
Dave Abrahams had already pointed out it wasn't really "safe" as

If the safety improvement Kevlin Henney suggested holds up, we can
stick with the "safe_downcast" name if we want. But otherwise a
change is in order.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at