Sure. Here: http://geneviz.googlecode.com/files/ugly.zip Regards, Jacek On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 6:48 PM, Steven Watanabe wrote:

AMDG

yabcok wrote:

...

I have a problem with BOOST_FOREACH never ending under specific conditions described here:

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2881491/need-help-with-boost-foreach-comp...

Could anyone help me understand what's going on?

Can you reduce it to something I can actually compile and run myself?  The code you posted is incomplete, I don't see an obvious explanation, and bugs like this are often nasty to trace.

In Christ, Steven Watanabe

_______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users

On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 9:02 PM, yabcok wrote:

I simplified the code even more. Get it here: http://yabcok.nazwa.pl/ugly3.zip In release build (VC2008 SP1) there's an infinite BOOST_FOREACH loop, debug builds and other compilers (gcc, vc10) are OK.

My skills are insufficient to root cause this problem. Could anyone help me out?

Your iterator increment function in vector_elements_list.h is broken. In the case you attached the iterator starts with a handle of zero. The first increment will cause handle to be incremented to one. Subsequent increment operations have no effect.

Regards, Jacek

Regards, Neil Groves

On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 4:17 PM, yabcok wrote:

I'm afraid you are wrong. Subsequent handle values would be 0, 1, INVALID_ELEMENT_HANDLE.

Yes, you are correct. The sequence is always 0, 1, INVALID_ELEMENT_HANDLE.

Please, compare this program behavior in release and debug builds, to see the real problem (infinite lopp at the last BOOST_FOREACH).

I have looked into this problem, and have tracked it down to an interaction between code optimization and the use of std::pair with BOOST_FOREACH. The problem can be worked around by replacing std::pair with boost::iterator_range<Iterator> which to my mind is a neater solution anyhow. Hopefully this information will be of some use to you, and I shall continue to investigate the problem with std::pair.

Regards, Jacek

Sorry for my earlier mistake. Regards, Neil Groves