From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-03-19 18:57:57
At 05:59 PM 3/19/2001, williamkempf_at_[hidden] wrote:
>... I do think that a configurable
>assertion would be appropriate for Boost libraries in general, but I
>don't want to tackle this idea specifically for Boost.Threads.
That is the best plan.
While a configurable assert sounds intriguing, it may turn out to be much
further off that one might think. Lots of good programmers have tried to
come up with a better assert, only to have their creations fall by the
That isn't to say others shouldn't keep trying, but until they succeed just
stick with assert() or throwing an exception, using the guidelines from
Dave Abrahams and others as to when to do which.
PS: If someone does come up with a configurable assert(), it probably
should avoid a name that includes "assert" or "ASSERT". People will just
assume it is yet another assert() replacement and make all sorts of
incorrect assumptions about it.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk