From: David Abrahams (abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-04-14 09:29:11
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]>
> Hmm. The intent was to separate 'costly' checks from 'free' checks. The
> must have a mechanism to make 'costly' checks disappear in release; I
> that it's possible to provide a similar mechanism for disabling the 'free'
> checks, although I don't see why I would want to disable them.
> In short, I'm saying that we should have two BOOST_PRECONDITIONs, one for
> situations where it's likely to have a performance impact in release, and
> one for places where it can safely be left on, even in high-perf code.
> I see scoped_ptr::operator*() as an example of a 'costly' check and
> function::operator()() as a 'free' check.
Even "free" checks cost code space (and some speed), for which embedded
programmers may not be willing to pay.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk