From: David Abrahams (abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-04-14 09:29:11
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]>
>
> Hmm. The intent was to separate 'costly' checks from 'free' checks. The
user
> must have a mechanism to make 'costly' checks disappear in release; I
guess
> that it's possible to provide a similar mechanism for disabling the 'free'
> checks, although I don't see why I would want to disable them.
>
> In short, I'm saying that we should have two BOOST_PRECONDITIONs, one for
> situations where it's likely to have a performance impact in release, and
> one for places where it can safely be left on, even in high-perf code.
>
> I see scoped_ptr::operator*() as an example of a 'costly' check and
> function::operator()() as a 'free' check.
Even "free" checks cost code space (and some speed), for which embedded
programmers may not be willing to pay.
no-free-lunch-ly y'rs,
dave