Re: [boost] program_options: undefined behaviour seems unavoidable

From: Ulrich Eckhardt (uli_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-12-04 15:55:12

You are 'stealing threads' (ask google, in case you don't know that term), 
just so you know. However...

On Saturday 04 December 2004 17:59, Oliver Kullmann wrote:
> 3) I'm using g++ version 3.4.3, and I compiled Boost with this compiler,
> but to whatever library from Boost I link, I get warning messages like the
> above; another example
>
> > g++ calender.o -lboost_date_time-gcc
>
> /usr/bin/ld: warning: libstdc++.so.5, needed by
> /usr/local/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.4.3/../../../libboost_date_time-gcc.
>so, may conflict with libstdc++.so.6

I seriously doubt that you used the same compiler. Above warning suggests that 
you used an older version of the stdlib (and compiler), which can lead to all 
kinds of subtle problems. Recompile that lib first and try again.

About the problem of not having a virtual dtor: it is not necessary. The 
general rule is to have either a public virtual one or a non-public 
non-virtual one. No, I did not inspect the code in question, so won't comment 
on that. Another thing is that when using shared_ptr<>, they still manage to 
call the right dtor, you can even store objects safely in a shared_ptr<void>!

Uli