Re: [boost] [serialization] Serialisation/deserialisation offloating-point values

From: Edward Diener (eddielee_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-04 16:50:01

Paul A Bristow wrote:
> | -----Original Message-----
> | From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] 
> | [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Edward Diener
> | Sent: 04 April 2006 17:36
> | To: boost_at_[hidden]
> | Subject: Re: [boost] [serialization] 
> | Serialisation/deserialisation offloating-point values
> | 
> | Paul A Bristow wrote:
> | > 
> | > (Digression - because of the memory leak in stringstream in 
> | VS 8.0 (it is
> | > disgraceful that we haven't had an SP1 for this),
> | 
> | Another digression.
> | 
> | They have an online bug reporting system at 
> | http://lab.msdn.microsoft.com/productfeedback/default.aspx. 
> | So far they appear to be very responsive to any bugs reported.
> 
> A workaround for the problem above has been issued - but it involves
> re-compiling to produce a new .dll, a significant hassle.
> 
> My view is that this is not good enough - the very least is issue of a new
> .dll.
> But an SP1 would be better - there seem to be number of things they have
> fixed.
> 
> I have expressed this view to their forum (and I am not alone!).

MS has been in no-SP mode since VS .NET has come out.

> 
> The response to the original report on 7.1 loopback was
> 
> http://lab.msdn.microsoft.com/productfeedback/viewfeedback.aspx?feedbackid=7
> bf2f26d-171f-41fe-be05-4169a54eef9e
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/mpk72
> 
> essentially "it's a feature" - but then it was fixed in 8.0!

It is demoralizing but you have to argue with MS once they gave one of 
their inane responses justifying bugs as "as designed".

> 
> So don't hold your breath on this - VS 2008??

Possibly, but of course there is no guarantee it will be fixed even in a 
future new release. But I think once you force MS to admit that 
something is truly a bug, they will fix it. This is much better than 
Borland who, even when they knew a bug existed, simply decided to ignore 
both the bug report or any future fix.

> 
> I suspect that the Fair Dinkumware version may be corrected already - would
> anyone like to test?

What is Fair Dinkumware ?