Re: [boost] Deprecate BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT?

From: Brian Ravnsgaard Riis (brian_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-06-23 04:26:41

David Abrahams wrote:
> John Maddock wrote:
> 
>> The other issue is with MPL's messages: sorry Dave, but the first time I
>> saw
>> an MPL assertion failure, my immediate reaction was "what the heck is
>> that?"
>> :-(
> 
> Don't you think everyone reacts the same way the first time they trigger
> a BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT?
> 

I know I did, that's for sure.

Anyway, Robert Ramey mentioned that Boost.MPL is not the obvious place 
for anyone to go browsing for a "better BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT". Heck, I 
didn't realize there was anything like that in there (though, in 
retrospect, I probably should have guessed).

Possibly that part should be factored out, as you mentioned, and 
BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT implemented in terms of it, as a convenience macro?

Of course, regardless, the whole shebang should probably use c++0x 
static_assert if available, but I've not yet seen the error messages 
produced by any of the compilers that already support it, so I'm in no 
position to judge really.

  /Brian