Re: [boost] [announce] Overload V2

From: Marco Costalba (mcostalba_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-03-22 14:49:26

On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 7:18 PM, Kevin Scarr <kscarr_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Marco Costalba wrote:
>
>  > It comes much more naturally to me to think at this:
>  >
>  > if (ptr)
>  >    ptr->doSomething();
>
>  Ok. This usage is fine with me. I guess I just hadn't seen the
>  overload<> as being a declaration of an object with pointer behaviour.
>
>  If that is what it is, then I would prefer the usage above.
>
>  Thanks for the clarification,
>

I'm browsing standard exceptions but I fail to see something suitable
in this case.

A little of background: when you call an overload with some arguments,
as example

f(7);

According to the arguments type and arity a specific operator() of the
overload class is called by the compiler.

This operator() mainly dereferences the content of an auto_ptr that
points to a functor wrapper that does the job.

If no function as been already assigned then auto_ptr is empty and is
here the a segfault occurs, when you try to dereference it's content.

So, I would like to ask you what exception type do you suggest could
be suitable to throw in this case?

Thanks
Marco