From: Dave Harris (brangdon_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-10-09 12:45:28
In-Reply-To: <4343103A.6010007_at_[hidden]>
darren_at_[hidden] (Darren Cook) wrote (abridged):
> I think it is fair to assume people don't have assert(false) in code
> that is ready for release - it is just used temporarily during
> debugging.
No, it isn't fair to assume that. I have:
if (e) {
assert(false);
throw "can't happen";
}
or similar in release code.
> But just to be sure OKAY_TO_USE_ASSUME should be off by default.
A single monolithic switch isn't practical. There is no way to switch
OKAY_TO_USE_ASSUME on without first checking whether every piece of code
in the program is OK with it.
> > If that is the behavior of __assume(false), or at least given
> > that it is a reasonable interpretation of what it could do, then
> > including __assume() in BOOST_ASSERT() seems a little dangerous.
>
> Which brings up back to the start of this thread :-).
Quite so. I find I am repeating myself.
-- Dave Harris, Nottingham, UK.