8 Apr
2009
8 Apr
'09
4:24 p.m.
David Abrahams wrote:
on Tue Apr 07 2009, "troy d. straszheim" <troy-AT-resophonic.com> wrote:
Gevorg Voskanyan wrote:
Eric Niebler wrote:
Yep, it compiles, and yep, it violates the preconditions. I choose not to enforce the preconditions because doing so would cause extra template instantiations and lengthen compile times. As long as valid programs compile and do the right thing, I'm happy. OK, thanks Eric.
How about a macro BOOST_PROTO_EXTRA_CHECKING or something like that to have those kind of checks conditionally?
I could see a BOOST_MPL_DISABLE_ASSERTS token, behavior analogous to BOOST_DISABLE_ASSERTS.
It's a very good idea, IMO. Open a ticket?