Boost logo

Boost :

From: Jeffrey Faust (jefffaust_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-05-22 23:24:38

Michael Fawcett wrote:

> On 5/22/07, Jeffrey Faust <jefffaust_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> I'm interested in non-intrusive means, of which neither of your
> proposals really satisfy. Modifying your own code to store the value
> and watching that variable in the debugger is just a workaround for
> the debugger's deficiency. I think all of the previous points raised
> by Giovanni about modifying the Boost code and imposing yet another
> macro are valid, and it is a better but still undesirable solution.

I suppose you could argue that a debugger should be able to look at any
address as any type you pick. The aligned memory construct is certainly a
difficult case.

True, it is an intrusive patch, but that's not what I meant. An intrusive
change into library code is not noticed by the user. My goal was to
provide a benefit to what I see is a weakness in the library, at very
little cost.

> There have been a few threads specific to debugging Boost libraries in
> Visual Studio (3 to be exact, links below) which would be of interest
> to me if implemented on a larger and more complete scale. Modifying
> autoexp.dat to allow Boost classes to be visualized is non-intrusive
> and ideal IMHO, although, one could still argue it's just a workaround
> for a deficient debugger ;)

Thanks for the links. I'll definitely use the ptr container additions.
Still, I've tried to find a solution for boost::optional some time ago and
failed. The link that mentions it is for only int64, and not a general
solution. I'll try to tackle the problem again with autoexp.dat.
However, I've failed previously, and don't expect better results this time

Jeff Faust

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