Re: [RFC] err |= ios_base::failbit or err = ios_base::failbit?!?

[Martin Sebor <sebor at roguewave dot com>]

Nathan Myers wrote:

...
> > That will be the case with num_get
> > and money_get, but not time_get. Another problem is that the
> > caller might leave the iostate variable uninitialized, and
> > expect the get() member function to set it regardless of
> > whether it succeeds or not. That seems to be the case with
> > num_get but not the other facets.
>
>
> Right.  But generally, initialization is supposed to be the 
> responsibility of the owner of the object, e.g. whoever created 
> it.

Yes, I agree with this policy in general. In the case of functions
whose performance is critical, though, it may, IMHO, be quite
appropriate to violate it by allowing callers to pass uninitialized
iostate by requiring the get() members to always set its value. Not
only could it save a CPU cycle or two, but it would also make the
get functions more robust in the presence of user errors. Unless
you or someone else objects to a change to the text that would
codify this policy I will write up an issue and propose that all
facets, not just num_get, behave this way.

Martin