Re: [Boost-users] [multi_index] SIGABRT in multi_index_container constructor

From: Manuel Jung (gzahl_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-02-17 14:03:08

Hi,

I think something ist bad about the SAFE MODE or INVARIANT CHECKING. With
them active, i have some trouble with other variables and containers of my
programm. e.g. with a curlpp::Multi and even with a std::list. If i switch
these Scripts of everything works fine.
when they were switched on, the size() member didnt work for example.
I dont know about the library that much but it seems there is some bug in
the SAFE MODE scripts.
:-(

Greetings
Manu

Ps.: For now ill use std::queue and try later upgrade to multi_index's for
more features and better priority sorting.

> "JOAQUIN LOPEZ MU?Z" wrote:
> 
>> ----- Mensaje original -----
>> De: Manuel Jung <gzahl_at_[hidden]>
>> Fecha: Jueves, Febrero 15, 2007 11:17 pm
>> Asunto: Re: [Boost-users] [multi_index] SIGABRT in
>> multi_index_containerconstructor
>> Para: boost-users_at_[hidden]
>> 
>> [...]
>>> yes, the safe mode is on with this code:
>>> #if !defined(NDEBUG)
>>> #define BOOST_MULTI_INDEX_ENABLE_INVARIANT_CHECKING
>>> #define BOOST_MULTI_INDEX_ENABLE_SAFE_MODE
>>> #endif
>> 
>> Hey, I had an overlook! The jung.cpp file I sent you only
>> defines the safe mode macro, but you've got to define
>> both this and the invariant checking macro to reproduce
>> the problematic conditions. Could you please add
>> (at line 1) the missing
>> 
>> #define BOOST_MULTI_INDEX_ENABLE_INVARIANT_CHECKING
>> 
>> and check whether you still are crash free? I don't
>> think this overlook will make any difference, but it's
>> better to be on the safe side.
> 
> Hi,
> 
> no difference here. All the same in the test case. It runs just fine.
> 
> Manuel Jung
> 
> 
>> 
>> Thank you,
>> 
>> Joaquín M López Muñoz
>> Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Boost-users mailing list
> Boost-users_at_[hidden]
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users