From: Glen Knowles (gknowles_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-11-16 02:32:56
> From: Eric Woodruff [mailto:Eric.Woodruff_at_[hidden]]
> In my opinion, assertions indicate enfrorcement of pre/post conditions,
> are separate from the algorithmic logic of a function. What happens from
> result of the assertion, an exception or an abort is a separate issue.
> Consider (if assert takes a boost::function0<void>):
> assert (!harddrive.isFragmented (), boost::bind (&HardDrive::defrag,
> In this case, it there is a simple remedy to the failed pre-condition. The
> alternative is: assert (!harddrive.isFragmented (), std::abort);
In the first case you're not talking about a failed precondition, because
the logic (of which the assert is a part) is designed to handle both cases.
I don't like the idea of using assert in that way at all and would strongly
encourage it be replaced with:
if (!harddrive.isFragmented()) harddrive.defrag();
I really agree with Peter here, assert shouldn't have a canned option for
throwing. When you really need logic errors to throw you have to put a
non-trivial supporting infrastructure in place and very likely a more
complex protocol then a simple throw. I've spent the last year working on
a server with a "can't stop" requirement and the objects it throws
may include information about the subsystem that's been affected and the
scope of the problem.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk