Re: [boost] compile time asserts [preconditions]

From: Nathan Myers (ncm_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-07-31 16:44:56

William Kempf wrote:

> I strongly suggest you pick a different name.  Preconditions already
> have a very well known meaning, for which a compile time assert does
> not work.  Specifically, a precondition is one of the three
> components that build up the foundation of DBC (design by contract):
> precondition, postcondition and invariant.  All of these are runtime
> assertions.  A precondition is that that must be upheld before a
> function can be called (aka it's what you must insure when you call a
> function).

It's not just a matter of choosing a word already in use.  To call 
it BOOST_PRECONDITION would be to mix levels: assertions are used to 
enforce preconditions, among other things.  It would be like calling
a disk block a file.  Yes, sometimes a file lives in a disk block, but
a file also has a directory entry and/or an inode, and a file often
spans disk blocks, and some things stored in blocks aren't files.  

This construct does not itself constitute a precondition, it's just 
(maybe) enforcing one.
 
Nathan Myers
ncm at cantrip dot org