[Boost-users] Signals & Slots

-----Original Message----- From: boost-users-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-users- bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of WangYun Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 10:03 AM To: boost-users Subject: [Boost-users] Signal with return value will crash

I tried the signals, the code below will crash

#include int _tmain(int argc, _TCHAR* argv[]) { boost::signal _sig; _sig(10);

return 0; }

but code below works well

#include int _tmain(int argc, _TCHAR* argv[]) { boost::signal _sig; _sig(10);

return 0; }

The only difference is one has return value, the other doesn't, is

Hello, I was just reading some mention of bugs in boost::signal, is this implementation in competition with libsigc++? i.e. does it aim to do the same job, but under a different license, or is there perhaps some fundamental design difference between the two? Maybe it's a totally unrelated library (it doesn't look that way, but still ...). Either way, thank you for any information. Regards gaz -----Original Message----- From: boost-users-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-users-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Nat Goodspeed Sent: 17 November 2004 13:39 To: boost-users@lists.boost.org Subject: RE: [Boost-users] Signal with return value will crash this a

bug or by design?

[Nat] The difference between a void slot and one with a return value is that in the latter case, the signal needs a combiner to figure out what to do with multiple returns from multiple slots. See: http://www.boost.org/doc/html/ch06s02.html#id2520177 I haven't actually tried your example, but it looks to me as though the default combiner isn't working for you. But then you probably want something other than the default anyway -- unless you don't care about the values returned by your slots -- in which case why not use void slots? _______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users