Subject: Re: [boost] Is there interest in unit testing both passing and failing BOOST_MPL_ASSERTs?
From: Ábel Sinkovics (abel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-09-16 01:24:14
> Why not use the function-type-trick with double parentheses employed by
> BOOST_MPL_ASSERT and avoid the need to write a separate typedef?
Because when there is a syntax error, the compiler can point me to the
location of the error in the typedef. When I define the body of the
predicate in a macro call, the compiler points me to the macro call,
thus the error is more difficult to locate.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk