From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-07-01 12:57:03
Michael Behrns-Miller wrote:
> Is there a way to make the end-of-the-chain error message
> (`boost::STATIC_ASSERTION_FAILURE<false>' does not
> have member `value') more clear? I would rate the severity of the
> difficulty a 2 or 3 out of 10, from a new user's perspective. It
> seemed intuitive enough once I understood the requirement. Putting
> the serialization save calls within a const save(archive) function of
> the object being serialized made it a non-issue for me. I haven't used
it
> enough to say I won't run into the const issue again, but at least I
> know about it now.
This is something other people has asked for but we've never been able to
figure out how to implement it. Whenever I do include a BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT
that a library user might be expected to trip on, I include comments at that
point which describes the problem and hopefully a helpful course of action.
When I build in my environment (VC 7.1) and double click on the error
message, the BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT pops up and right there is the comment
explaining it. To me, this seems pretty good and I would hope that this
would minimize the time a user has to spend looking for sources to these
problems. In fact, I have received mail from users that have remarked upon
exactly this feature/practice as being very helpful in understanding these
other wise very subtle errors. By far the best one is when one uses an
xml_archive to serialize something which doesn't have a variable name
attached. It pops a STATIC_ASSERT and the comment right there is the
comment describing what one is doing wrong.
Robert Ramey