"1100110" wrote in message news:ldl9fj$28g6$1...@digitalmars.com...
> I don't think it's worth throwing out assert over. A runtime that
> supported assert + Object would be about 8 lines and would IMO be
But then where do we stop?
This is why I think it's an excellent idea to have multiple flags, or
options, one for each thing disabled.
So you can only disable what you do not want.
'assert' is pretty fundamental (compared to something like exceptions) and
is especially important in low-level code. It can also be disabled
I guess worst case the compiler could inline it as `e ||
> This puts us in the nasty situation of having code behave differently
> with and without the switch. Like dynamic cast, I'd rather it was a
> compile-time error and you had to use arr.ptr[0..newlen] instead.
Very Very good point there. I didn't think about that. Code should not
behave any differently with different switches. Period. I seriously
doubt it would make it into the repo either.
Hmm, I forgot about new and delete. They would be nice to have as wrappers
around malloc, but that would change the meaning of code...