From: John Torjo (john.lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-08-22 12:39:40
Darryl Green wrote:
> John Torjo wrote:
>>I don't think construction is tricky. I think knowing whether I'm still
>>constructed - that's the problem.
> You can never test for "still constructed" using data that is part of
> the possibly destructed object - all you get is undefined behavior.
> You don't need the test if you can live with never destroying the
But as you pointed out, it's only for statically constructed objects.
> That works, but I think the interface reflects a design choice (mixing
> naming/registering the appender and connecting it) that should be
Yes, you're right. Your idea is much better, and I'll try to implement
it ASAP. If you can do it, that would be even better :)
(I've posted the latest version of Boost.Log at http://www.torjo.com)
-- John Torjo, Contributing editor, C/C++ Users Journal -- "Win32 GUI Generics" -- generics & GUI do mix, after all -- http://www.torjo.com/win32gui/ -v1.6.3 (Resource Splitter) -- http://www.torjo.com/cb/ - Click, Build, Run!
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk