From: John Torjo (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-05-02 01:53:59
Hi Andrei,
(sorry for the late reply, I've been off work for a week)
> > >
> > > assert( (i < j) || (i == 0) || (j == 1) ); would change into
> > > SMART_ASSERT( (v_(i) < v_(j)) || (i == 0) || (j == 1) );
> > >
> > > The output of the above (in case the assertion fails) can look like:
> > >
> > > Assertion failed:
> > > '(v_(i) < v_(j)) || (i < 0) || (v_(k) == -1)'
> > > i= '3'
> > > j= '2'
> > > k= '1'
> > >
> > This feature looks handy. Short macro like "v_" is IMHO acceptable, it
> won't
> > clash with definition like:
> > int v_;
> >
> > I wounder if it could be somehow merged with
> > http://www.cuj.com/experts/2104/alexandr.htm?topic=experts ?
>
> By the way, I believe what would be more interesting for Boost is the
> recent article (http://www.cuj.com/experts/2106/alexandr.htm), written by
> Petru Marginean and myself. (Warning - the article has recently been
> updated.)
>
> We have good experience in reducing source code size by using
enforcements.
> There are a number of interesting techniques used out there, and I believe
> ENFORCE would be quite useful as a Boost library.
>
Yes, indeed. I've read your article about ENFORCE as well. It's great! I
think we can somehow merge them. I'll try do propose something next week.
Best,
John