Re: [boost] Boost public interface macro names

From: Beman Dawes (beman_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-11-09 13:18:40

John Maddock wrote:

 >Beman,
 >
 >>Perhaps I should just work on a core proposal for a new language
 >>feature.  All of the macro uses we are talking about are needed to get
 >>__FILE__ and __LINE__.  How about two new special symbols:
 >>
 >>namespace boost {
 >>   static_assert( bool exp, const char * file=__FILE_AT_USE,
 >>                  int line=__LINE_AT_USE );
 >>}
 >>
 >>The compiler is required to replace these with the appropriate value at
 >the
 >>point of a call to static_assert(), rather than at point of declaration.
 >
 >If this were going forward as part of the standard I would say yes call 
in
 >"static_assert" and place it <cassert>, either as a regular macro, or as 
a
 >core language extention (depending how the vendor sees it).
 >
 >However, there is a problem with your approach wrt boost:  how does the
 >static_assert function you've defined above, convert the bool parameter 
to
 >a static assertion (as an integral constant expression)?

I don't know without language support.  It keeps coming back to that; there 
needs to be better language support for diagnostic tools.

__FILE_AT_USE and __LINE_AT_USE would allow some better user written tools 
like various improved runtime asserts, so they wouldn't be be totally 
useless.  I'm just trying to provoke thought, not actually present a 
finished solution.

--Beman