Re: [boost] Re: current_function.hpp extension

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-07-19 08:04:53

Daniel Frey wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 02:08:24 +0200, Pavel Vozenilek wrote:
>
>> "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>> news:005201c34d60$e47afb50$1d00a8c0_at_pdimov2... ...
>> SMART_ASSERT library implements BOOST_HAS_CURRENT_FUNCTION equivalent
>> (it would be ugly to print out the default text).
>
> Log-output again. And look at that workaround they used:
> Runtime-checking the values. Isn't that ugly? (No offense intended
> to the SMART_ASSERT-folks :)

Yes, it's ugly to see "Assertion failed in function (unknown)". The ugliness
provides a strong incentive for people to submit patches that make
BOOST_CURRENT_FUNCTION work on the compilers they are interested in. That's
the goal. Sneaky, huh.