Re: [boost] suggestion on assertion macros

Subject: Re: [boost] suggestion on assertion macros
From: Roland Bock (rbock_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-15 14:28:16

DE wrote:
[snip]
>> I plan on using that myself. I think it would be useful for others, too.
>>     
> i came to the same thing
> this solution works perfect with msvc80 and i feel like going to
> adopt it for my personal use
>
> but i think you missed the order of macro directives
> if i get it right it should be
>
> #ifdef NDEBUG
>   #ifdef assert
>      #undef assert
>   #endif    //swapped this and the following lines
>   #define assert(cond) static_cast<void>(sizeof(cond? 0: 0));
> #endif
>
> and i agree that defining an "advanced" project-specific macro is
> really a better solution than redefinition of 'assert()'
>   
Right, so I end up with

#include <cassert>

#ifndef NDEBUG
   #define my_assert(cond) assert(cond)
#else
   #define assert(cond) static_cast<void>(sizeof(cond? 0: 0));
#endif

I think I'll advocate this thing every once in a while :-)

Today I stumbled across a warning in Spirit 2.1 (did not look at the 
current code) which could have been removed by using such an assert 
definition.