From: williamkempf_at_[hidden]
Date: 2001-03-19 17:59:15
--- In boost_at_y..., Jesse Jones <jejones_at_a...> wrote:
> >For CloseHandle this is very true. However, this discussion
started
> >with the checks made for misuse of the lock types (such as multiple
> >lock attempts). It seems to me that this is still a gray area.
Some
> >seem to think it should be an exception, others an assertion (with
> >the ability to leave it "on" during release/production builds).
>
> I'm not sure there is anyone left who wants to assert on multiple
lock
> attempts. Asserts are only reasonable if you can catch all the
problems
> during development and QA. But problems due to race conditions seem
to veer
> into runtime error territory.
I didn't get the feeling that everyone agreed on this count, but if
they do I feel a lot better :). For the short term I'll change the
other error checks to standard C asserts, though I probably won't get
this done until tomorrow (there will be another upload later tonight
with other changes, however). I do think that a configurable
assertion would be appropriate for Boost libraries in general, but I
don't want to tackle this idea specifically for Boost.Threads.
Bill Kempf