Boost Users :
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 -
>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
Boost-users list run by williamkempf at hotmail.com, kalb at libertysoft.com, bjorn.karlsson at readsoft.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, wekempf at cox.net