"Pavel Vozenilek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > "John Torjo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > 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_;
but it will clash with 'int v_(1);', right. regards Thorsten _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
