Re: [Boost-users] [serialization] Bug in text_oarchive but not inxml_oarchive?

From: Bill Lear (rael_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-04 13:14:50

On Thursday, May 4, 2006 at 10:00:17 (-0700) Robert Ramey writes:
>
>Well, maybe next time you migtht consider titling your message
>something other than "Bug in text_oarchive but not inxml_oarchive?"
>like perhaps - "[serialization]I can't figure out when I'm doing wrong - 
>please Help"
>Its really irksome to an author of a library like this which includes
>50 tests x 5 archives x 10? compilers (2500 testing scenarios) to
>defend the proposition that the library is correct because some
>huge an un-understandable program (10 MB of stack space
>and thousands of stack frames - good grief!) throws and exception
>and the author hasn't even found where the exception is thrown.
>Just a heads up - I'm a sensitive guy.

That's why I did two things: put a question mark in the title, and
said "thank you" lots.

Don't forget: it wasn't throwing an exception, this was a side issue
that I introduced late.  It was core dumping in the text version of
the library and not in the xml version.  My initial assumption, that
you confirmed --- both of us wrong --- was that this was a priori
evidence of something being wrong with the text version of the
library.  When I had reported bugs before that exhibited this
behavior, you mentioned this yourself.  So, I just wanted confirmation
on where to begin my search --- I wasn't asking for a defense, as I
wasn't making an accusation (again, the question mark).

Yes, my fault for not doing the obvious (in hindsight) and simply
upping the stack space, but in general, as I think you can see clearly
from my posts to this list over time, I try to be very careful in my
queries and try to assume that this might not be a problem in boost
and leave ample room for pointing the finger at myself.

Thank you, by the way, for taking time to answer my questions on
optimization.

Bill