Boost Users :
From: Hugh Hoover (hugh_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-20 20:28:06
On May 20, 2006, at 13:07, Robert Ramey wrote:
> Hugh Hoover wrote:
>> 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).
Ah - ok... then perhaps down further, like in
oserializer::save_pointer where it's trying to dereference the
bpos_ptr, assuming it has a valid one?
> I'm not sure which compiler your using - but some implement
gcc4 and vc8
> correctly - obviating the need for BOOST_IS_ABSTRACT. Maybe that's
I can try checking if they're correct already and just drop my usage
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