Boost logo

Boost Users :

From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-20 16:07:20

Hugh Hoover wrote:
> On May 20, 2006, at 09:16, Robert Ramey wrote:
>> Hugh Hoover wrote:
>>> I note that the boost cvs tip version (for 1_34) also does not have
>>> an assert there. I'm not sure if that would have helped me figure
>>> out what was wrong, but at least an assert would terminate things
>>> closer to the source of the problem...
>> exactly where do you think the assert should go?
> I think in boost::archive::detail::save_pointer_type<>::invoke (in
> oserializer.hpp) - right after it gets the bpos_ptr from
> register_type. I presume (but I'm not absolutely certain) that you
> should ALWAYS get back a valid bpos_ptr at this point?

I don't think so. It looks to me that a NULL bpos_ptr signfies
an abstract class. and its not a mistake to serialize an abstract
class - (the system calls the actual derived classes).

> Adding one of those "you might have made this mistake" comments at
> that point with something about BOOST_IS_ABSTRACT on a derived class
> would have shortened my debugging time by DAYS - but I'm not certain
> if that's the main reason for the failure or if anything else could
> cause that kind of failure?

I'm not sure which compiler your using - but some implement is_abstract
correctly - obviating the need for BOOST_IS_ABSTRACT. Maybe that's

Robert Ramey

> Anyway - thanks for the quick reply and all of the excellent work!
> Hugh Hoover
> Enumclaw Software

Boost-users list run by williamkempf at, kalb at, bjorn.karlsson at, gregod at, wekempf at