AMDG On 05/29/2012 03:04 AM, Dave Abrahams wrote:
on Tue May 22 2012, Steven Watanabe <watanabesj-AT-gmail.com> wrote:
Online documentation can be found here: http://steven_watanabe.users.sourceforge.net/type_erasure/libs/type_erasure/
http://steven_watanabe.users.sourceforge.net/type_erasure/libs/type_erasure/... says:
The types of the arguments must match or the behavior is undefined.
I presume you mean that the dynamic, erased types must match? (presumably you could easily prevent the use of different static types at compile-time). IMO it's crucial that you be rigorous about these distinctions in your documentation.
I've tried to clarify this.
I wonder if undefined behavior is really the best possible choice here. I honestly don't know what's most useful. Do you have a rationale for your choice?
It's impossible to enforce this statically, so the only alternative is to throw an exception. I do provide a mode that does this. By default the library assumes that you've made sure that the types match. If you add relaxed_match, it will check whether the arguments match and if they don't, either fall back on some reasonable default behavior or throw. In Christ, Steven Watanabe