On 12/15/2011 04:29 PM, Terrence Enger wrote:
Nowhere is it written that you will understand everything.
Sometimes there are surprising side-effects. :)
So, I take it, the helpful question to investigate is the
reason why the state of the object violates the
expectation--the expectation that the container is empty--
that the destructor asserts. Or, coming from the opposite
side of the question, why should the destructor expect the
container to be empty by that time?
Yes. I would assume that the destructor's expectation is legitimate,
and that the code keeping the container non-empty is in error. But
maybe Michael Stahl can tell you more about this; at least, he recently
changed that assertion into a true one (aborting the program in a debug
build), so looks like he considers the assertion correct, too.
Stephan
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.