On 08/02/14 21:19, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On 8/2/2014 6:20 AM, Artur Skawina via Digitalmars-d wrote: >> The bug was _introduced_ by the assert, the code was 100% correct. > > Asserts are part of the code, and writing incorrect asserts is writing buggy > code.
This was about incorrect asserts from one part of the program infecting other (correct) parts. Nobody is saying that such a program isn't buggy. Most, if not all, programs have bugs. Your assert (re-)definition makes the assert /assumptions/, which are unchecked in release builds, _override_ other explicit checks. A wrong assert is not necessarily less likely than wrong code. There's nothing wrong with `assume`, it's very useful for optimizations. But it's too dangerous to tack `assume` onto `assert`. If they are kept separate then it's at least possible to carefully audit every 'assume'. People *will* use them for micro-optimizations, and they *will* make mistakes. artur
