------- Comment #2 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-30 14:30 -------
(In reply to comment #0)
>
> I would assume the result of doing a get() when !valid() is undefined,
No need to assume, it's stated explicitly in the FCD.
> so
> throwing an exception when someone does this would be conforming, and a lot
> more obvious and friendly. If for some reason this couldn't work, even just an
> assertion fail would be more informative than a NULL pointer deref.
Confirming, as an enhancement request.
I'm travelling until Tuesday so won't look in detail right now, but IIRC there
are possible race conditions so it's not necessarily as simple as just checking
for a NULL pointer.
--
redi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |redi at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Severity|normal |enhancement
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-07-30 14:30:35
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45133
