On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:03:00 +0100, Adrian Perez de Castro <aperez@igalia.com> wrote: > Well, of course you are right, it is an overloaded operator, which > (unfortunately, IMHO) looks like a pointer dereference. That is exactly > one of the things that I find more confusing about C++: it has features > like operator overloading which look cool initially, but that in the end > imply more complexity than needed. I can understand why you decided to > wrap Xapian with a plain C API :) I'm glad you agree. Though I should mention that I earned my summer's salary during an internship once by solving a performance problem that had dodged the engineers on the project, (since they overlooked an overloaded array subscript operator on a std::string class as something that could be expensive---profiling made it obvious, and a temporary copy to a real array with a real subscript fixed the bug). So I can't say that operator overloading never helped me. But I know I left that internship determined not to use it myself. > I can confirm that this patch avoids the segfault in my case, too. Thanks > a lot for the quick fix. Excellent. I'm glad to hear it worked for you. I'm sorry that the bug was there, since this was a regression that's come back once or twice now. The project is overdue for a test suite already... -Carl