Hi, I tried this out, and it is looking good (gcc 3.2 on linux).
Example: SMART_ASSERT( (i < j) || (i < 0) || (k == -1) ) (i)(j)(k);
After the expression, you'll specify all the values that were involved in it, surrounded by (), like this: '(i)(j)(k)'
Actually you can specify any values in current scope, not just in the expression being asserted. E.g.
FILE *f=fopen(fname,"r");
SMART_ASSERT(f)(fname);
Is this officially supported or could it disappear in future?
- debug: a summary of the assertion is printed, and asks the user what to do (Ignore/ Retry/ Abort/etc.)
Can Retry be called "(D)ebug"? (and as you already use "D" perhaps detailed info could be called "(M)ore Details"?).
Retry suggests to me I can put the missing file in place and it will try the fopen() call again.
Also if cannot break into debugger I think:
bContinue = true;
is more useful than abort().BTW, I quickly found that I always wanted detailed output, so I made a ask_user_on_assert_console_detailed() function, which I've included at the end of this mail. I also did the two proposed changes above. Can this function be included? (but I think the briefer version should stay as the default.)
Default logger dumps all details of the assertion to a file called './asserts.txt'.
As someone else said I think I'd rather I had to specify the filename if I wanted this logging.
So far, it contains the __FILE__ and __LINE__ (and __FUNCTION__, if present).
Function name not appearing on linux. Do I have to do anything to enable this, or is it not supported for gcc yet?
9. Custom printing (NOT TESTED YET). You can set your own printer class.
Do you have an example of how to do this?
SMART_VERIFY behaves ***exacly like*** SMART_ASSERT, with two differences: - SMART_VERIFY will work in release mode as well - the default level of SMART_VERIFY is 'error'. Which means that if a SMART_VERIFY fails, an exception will be thrown by default. This makes sense, since the assertions you use in release could most likely be fatal.
I feel it should be the other way round - when I'm debugging I'm happy for an assert to kill the program, but if something asserts in the bug-free (!) runtime version I'd rather it quietly log it and try to continue - the assert may be a false alarm.
However I'd almost certainly be explicit about assert behaviour if using SMART_VERIFY in any serious program so the default is not so important.
Darren
----------------------------------------------------
inline void ask_user_on_assert_console_detailed( const assert_context & context) {
// show info to the user
std::cout << std::endl;
dump_all_assert_context( context, std::cout);
// read
std::cout << "\nChoose option: I - Ignore, D - Debug, A - Abort" << std::endl;
bool bContinue = true;
while ( bContinue) {
bContinue = false;
char ch = std::cin.get();
switch ( ch) {
case 'i': case 'I':
// ignore
break; case 'd': case 'D':
// retry
#ifdef BOOST_BREAK_INTO_DEBUGGER_DEFINED
break_into_debugger();
#else
// don't know how to break...
std::cout << "Don't know how to break into debugger..." <<
std::endl;
bContinue = true;
#endif
break; case 'a': case 'A':
// abort
abort();
break; default:
bContinue = true;
break;
};if ( !isspace( ch) && bContinue)
// ignore spaces
std::cout << "\nChoose option: I - Ignore, D - Debug, A - Abort" << std::endl;
};
// FIXME - do ignore_all;
// note: I will assume there is ONLY ONE assertion per line
// (reasonable assumtion), in order to be able to have
// 'Ignore All'.
}_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
