From: Jesse Jones (jesjones_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-11-27 00:34:40
At 11:39 PM -0500 11/26/01, David A. Greene wrote:
> >>I always thought it would be nice for my users to scream at me
>>>and then tell me where the problem is. :) A unique ID for each
>>>(static) message would be almost as good.
>> It's useful with asserts, but I can't think of anyplace where I've
>> used logging where it would be helpful.
>Well, I'd think we'd want some sort of panic/assert message support,
>and if we have that, why not include a line-number option for
Asserts and logging are two entirely different things. For asserts
you often get messages like "assert failed: x > 0". This doesn't
provide nearly enough information to locate the problem so people
tack on other stuff like the file and line number. But for logging
all you're really interested in is the text; you don't care where it
came from. At least, that's been my experience...
>Maybe it's not always needed, but are there serious
>downsides to including it? Yes, the preprocessor, but is there
>anything _else_? :)
Why complicate the design for a feature that very few people are
likely to use? And if they do want it they can use the __LINE__ macro
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk