23 Oct
2025
23 Oct
'25
3:26 a.m.
Vinnie Falco wrote:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 6:06 PM Andrey Semashev via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
But I actually have a hard time seeing how C++11 static_assert wouldn't cut it to such a degree that I would go an extra mile to define my own macro.
DIfferent people see things differently. I for example, prefer the 1-argument static_assert because of two reasons
* It is consistent (no variation in the emitted diagnostic) * I don't have to think about what string I want to put
The traditional approach is to use "" as the string. :-) There's a reason C++17 added the one argument static_assert. As it turns out, (a) people really don't want to think about what strings to put and (b) the expression is the more informative part anyway.