Subject: Re: [boost] [utility] [assert] Proposal for a new assert macro which stores the failed values ("informative assert")
From: Viktor Sehr (viktor.sehr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-06-06 20:38:09
I second the problem with BOOST_ASSERT_MSG. And I'm thinking it can be
> trivially worked around: BOOST_ASSERT_MSG could be (conditionally) defined
> like so:
> #if defined(BOOST_ASSERT_MSG_SIMPLIFIED)
> #define BOOST_ASSERT_MSG( expr, msg ) assert( (expr) || !msg )
> I might get something wrong, but why not simply #define BOOST_ASSERT_MSG(
expr, msg ) assert( expr)?
The point of the msg-part, to me, is to serialize variables?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk