Re: [boost] suggestion on assertion macros

Subject: Re: [boost] suggestion on assertion macros
From: Mateusz Loskot (mateusz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-13 16:21:06

Emil Dotchevski wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 2:43 AM, Andrzej Krzemienski <akrzemi1_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> This is a good addition to assertions, but once we decide that we are
>> improving assertions, there is much more that needs an improvement.
>> Most of them are listed in the thread on Contract++ library (proposed
>> for Boost) that you are already referring to. But let me list the
>> potential improvements here.
> 
> Why don't we leave assertions alone? Anything you do to "improve" them
> makes them more tolerable which makes them something other than
> assertions.
> 
> Assertions should print a message and exit. 

Well said.

The idea of "Be able to disable some assertions, " sounds
especially weird. Assertions are not for purpose of logging
and such. Categories of assertions severity make little
sense to me.

Best regards,
-- 
Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
Charter Member of OSGeo, http://osgeo.org