From: Stefan Seefeld (seefeld_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-11-25 12:39:39
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Which brings be to a nother point: It is _very_ bad of a library to
> require of the application to define NDEBUG to work properly.
> (The application should be able to decide for itself how NDEBUG/assert
> should be used.)
> Ublas should stop using NDEBUG and create their own BOOST_UBLAS_DEBUG
> or similar and use that instead.
Are you saying library code may not use the standard 'assert' macro,
then, at least not in headers ?
I don't quite agree with your statement. In fact, whenever you are using
libraries that are mostly implemented in headers, it becomes very hard
to encapsulate behavior the way you seem to request.
-- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk