On Thu, 13 Sep 2012, Derek Gaston wrote:
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Roy Stogner wrote:
Actually, point me to the 2008 thread? It's possible that I was wrong
and have since learned the error of my ways.
http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.mathematics.libmesh.devel/620
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Roy Stogner wrote:
> Vengeance is yours?
>
lol
> Actually, point me to the 2008 thread? It's possible that I was wrong
> and have since learned the error of my ways.
http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.mathematics.libmesh.devel/620
> On the other hand, I
On Thu, 13 Sep 2012, Derek Gaston wrote:
> Hmmm... There was a discussion all the way back in 2008 where I was
> wanting to get better error messages out of libMesh... and Roy shot
> me down ;-)
Vengeance is yours?
Actually, point me to the 2008 thread? It's possible that I was wrong
and have
Hmmm... There was a discussion all the way back in 2008 where I was wanting
to get better error messages out of libMesh... and Roy shot me down ;-)
Instead of specialized assert functions like this (have you been spending
too much time with cpp_unit?? ;-) why not just make libmesh_assert() take a
On Fri, 18 May 2012, Roy Stogner wrote:
> Would it make sense to have a few variant macros for common assertion
> cases, so that when those (debug+devel-mode) assertions get tripped we
> can immediately print more information about the failure?
>
> E.g. whereas
> libmesh_assert(a < b);
> fails w
IIRC I got shot down pretty unanimously the last time I proposed a
new libmesh_error/libmesh_assert type macro, but for this proposal
I think it's worth trying again:
Would it make sense to have a few variant macros for common assertion
cases, so that when those (debug+devel-mode) assertions get
