On 7/29/2014 1:07 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 07/29/2014 03:07 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 7/28/2014 1:49 PM, "Ola Fosheim Grøstad"
<ola.fosheim.grostad+dl...@gmail.com>" wrote:
You might want to assert() that you have enough headroom in a statically
allocated buffer when testing. Say you assert that the buffer is never
more than
50% full for normal loads. You obviously don't want the -release build
to make
such an assumption!
You're misunderstanding
He still has a point. This is just another case of the keyword not matching the
semantics very well. It would be more aptly named 'assume' instead of 'assert'
(and be un-@safe if release mode is to trust it unconditionally.)
I find this splitting of hares between assume and assert to be entirely
meaningless.
and misusing assert.
'assume' is completely redundant with 'assert'.
Only if you assume _a priori_ the program to be correct.
I've read yours and Ola's explanations of the difference, and I still can't
discern any difference, other than the spelling.
To have different debug builds, use debug statements.
'version(assert) assert' is a better match here, because if one uses 'debug
assert', there is the possibility of passing both -debug and -release and get
the undesired behaviour.
That cure sounds worse than the (supposed) problem.
I still have problems convincing people that assert is not to be used to
validate user input. Howinell is there any hope of getting anyone to understand
all this fine-grained hare-splitting? Heck, I don't see any useful difference
between assert and assume.
