Martin Sebor wrote: > >Eric Lemings wrote: >> >> For compile-time tests, would it be preferable to use a >static assertion >> or continue using good ol' rw_assert() even for compile-time >checks? In >> the former case, the test will fail to build and, in the latter case, >> the compile-time check will not be easily distinguisable from other >> runtime assertions. > >I would recommend against using one component of the library >(static_assert) to test another. > >The approach taken by existing tests is to verify types and >signatures by using them in ways that would make the tests >ill-formed if they didn't match the requirements, causing >a compiler error. You can see examples of this approach in >the 23.vector.cons.cpp test that was just mentioned. >
I happen to use this trick .. typedef char assert_0 [(cond) ? 1 : -1]; >Martin >
