From: Valentin Bonnard (Bonnard.V_at_[hidden])
Date: 1999-08-31 12:08:16
Beman Dawes wrote:
> The real question is whether to stick with assert() or try to develop
> something along the lines of assertion<>(). It seems to me that
> assertion<>() meets identified needs:
> * Code usually optimized away if not active.
Need a compile time constant to do that.
> * Avoids ODR violations.
Need an external variable initialised only once.
These tend to conflict.
I can see a solution, but it depends on the way #include
> #include <boost/assert.hpp>
> #include "debug_mode.hpp"
> extern const bool debug_mode;
> const bool debug_mode = true;
But it depends on a <> header being able to
include a "" header. (Sun cpp says no, it won't
> * Avoids possibly harmful macro usage.
> Needs identified so far that assertion<>() doesn't meet :
> * Reporting of file and line.
These are contradicting. We must choose.
> * Parameterization of exception type.
If it's only used for debugguing, it is worth the
-- Valentin Bonnard
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk