[boost] Re: assert() replacement?

From: Valentin Bonnard (Bonnard.V_at_[hidden])
Date: 1999-09-01 06:19:52

Kevlin Henney wrote:
> 
> Greg Colvin wrote:
> [...]
> Anyway, I prefer the string to be an optional second argument:
>     assertion (x ? t(3) : 3434==i+j, "must fobnicate before we tweak");

should be frobnicate, BTW

>    Yup. This approach can also be extended to deal w/ exception
>    parameterisation:
> 
>      assertion(x ? t(3) : 3434==i+j, logic_error("must fobnicate before we
>      tweak"));

Objects of type string and logic_error will be created 
for each assertion, even when ckecking is disabled.

The string will:
- compute the length of "must fobnicate before we tweak" 
  (about 30 steps)
- call allocator<whatever>::allocate (say 30)
- copy the string 

logic_error will then make a copy of the string

The destructor will:
- if the string is ref-counted, decrement the ref count, 
  check its value
- call allocator<whatever>::desallocate

logic_error will have to free its copy of the string

This at least involves a strlen, a memcpy, a malloc, 
and a free (or equivalent functions). 

Where efficiency counts, in a loop, this is absolutely 
unacceptable.

-- 
Valentin Bonnard