On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 1:58 PM, Mathias Gaunard < mathias.gaunard@ens-lyon.org> wrote:
That's a long paper to say "we should have three levels of asserts".
Actually, no, it's more like "there is, in practice, only 3 way to manage asserts", which is explained this long certainly because it's not that obvious. In my experience, I've been using similar custom libraries than what is proposed in this paper for a long time so I believe it's 1. correct 2. useful 3. a good deep analysis. Also, I belive that the fact that Bloomberg use this library internally and have been doing so for a lot of time makes their point have weight. (and it matches my experience, whatever the kind of projects I've been working on actually, as long as it's in C++)
I think it would be more interesting to have another API that is more scalable if you ever feel like having more levels.
I believe that there is no other "levels". By the way, one of the points is to let the library user provide an application-specific reaction to assertions if he/she wants. What more liberty than that would you want? Or maybe you have other ideas of how such library could be designed?