Well, the macro solution has the advantage that the implementation can be customized for each compiler to have the best possible error message without too much noise (other errors or warnings). What I like about boost solution is the fact that it can be used almost everywhere (for ex. in a class declaration or a global scope). What I dislike is that the error message is longer than necessary (with Visual C++) and that there are no version that would allows to display numerical values when doing comparison. My preferred solution would also include macros similar to that: BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT_EQUAL(a, b) BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT_LOWER_EQUAL(a, b) BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT_GREATER_EQUAL(a, b) BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT_NOT_EQUAL(a, b) BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT_LOWER(a, b) BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT_GREATER(a, b) and the error message would typically display a and b. The solution is based on weither convertion is possible : namespace boost { template <long A, long B, bool condition> struct value_condition { }; } As an example: #define BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT_LOWER(a, b) \ boost::value_condition<(a), (b), ((a) < (b))> \ (((void)0, boost::value_condition<(a), (b), true>())) The version for BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT_EQUAL could be simplified a bit since it will typically be used more often: namespace boost { template <long V> struct value{ }; } #define BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT_EQUAL(a, b) \ boost::value<(a)>(((void)0, boost::value<(b)>())) These macros could be modified a bit so that they would works in any scope as BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT do. The advantage is that the error message would should the value as in: BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT_EQUAL(sizeof(int), 3); An give an error message similar to: Cannot convert boost::value<3> to boost::value<4> So if we makes the wrong guess, we knows the value expected by the compiler... I think it would be a nice addition to boost to have them. Here I have used long (since it would works with negative numbers) but it would be best if this can be modified to works with any interger type. Maybe MPL could help for that. If this not possible, we should uses the biggest signed type on a platform or we might also have macros with an additional argument. Philippe