Re: [boost] Re: smart assert (was: ENFORCE/ better assertion technique)

From: John Torjo (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-05-08 06:49:20

> Darren Cook wrote:
> >
> > In my own assert library I added options for logging, but in the end
> > never used that and always had it throw an exception. This is nice for
> > two reasons:
> >   1. MFC debugger catches it and allows me to go back up the call stack
> > to where the assert happened. (I'm still struggling with gdb but I think
> > it can be set to do the same?)
> >
>
> Under win32, my assert method uses
>
> if (IsDebuggerPresent())
> {
> DebugBreak(); // ammounts to int 3 on intel
> }
>
> (IsDebuggerPresent() is a win32 method to see if a debugger is attached
> to the process)
>
> which I find better than the debugger catching an exception.  At my last
> work place, we made asserts through exceptions but ended up with
> exceptions being thrown in destructors and such which wasn't very nice,
> especially if the destructor was being called during clean up because of
> a previous exception.
>

Indeed, you're right. Also, I don't prefer throwing exceptions by default.
But, it's very simple to do so, if this is what you want.

Best,
John