Re: [Boost-users] Ugly warnings from BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT

From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-03-27 05:31:33

Beman Dawes wrote:
> John Maddock wrote:
>>> ...
>>> As you can see, it fails at line 3 as it should, while not
>>> complaining about line 2. It will not complain about any
>>> old-style-cast either. So the test was completely successful.
>>
>> Hardly that successful: those error messages are awful!  The whole
>> point of BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT is to provide semi-readable error
>> messages - at least so that you know it's a static assertion failure
>> and not some other issue that's the problem.
>>
>> I'll have another look at this when I have a chance.
>
> static_assert seems to be one of the first C++0x features compilers
> are implementing. Maybe we should be working on a transition plan for
> BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT. Or do you already have a plan and I'm just behind
> the times?

There's already a hook in the implementation to the native static_assert 
when available, however, a new macro that accepts a message string as well 
as the test might well be in order :-)

John.