From: Sam Partington (sam.partington_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-10 10:23:50
On 5/10/05, Pavel Vozenilek <pavel_vozenilek_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> "Dan Rosen" wrote:
> > 6. The exists(), is_null() and operator bool() methods fall prey to a
> > well known C++ pitfall. Have a look at Bjorn Karlsson's article, "The
> > Safe Bool Idiom": http://www.artima.com/cppsource/safebool.html.
> Looks so. It would be nice to have a common support for this
> in Boost, though.
I suggested this as an addition to the operators library sometime ago,
and patches to the code/docs/tests were applied, but they were later
removed. I'll to summarise why.
The first suggestion, which was based on Peters pointer to member
function conversion :
But then Daniel Frey found a problem with the implementation for
classes with integral conversion operators of their own. The integral
conversion operator was a better match and so the safe-bool conversion
was never called :
So then we tried an implementation based on using a private integral
conversion operator and a public operator bool :
This worked well in itself, but caused problems with the type traits
is_convertible (sorry, don't seem to be able to find a link to any of
Finally the whole topic was dropped after a long thread, and the code
was removed from the CVS tree. A shame I think though, as there were
still several open designs which had possiblities. The end of the
discussion is here :
I'd like to see the solution back in boost, we've been using it here
for a couple of years now without problems, and we find it very
useful. I'd be willing to put more work into it if there is interest.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk