• Matthew Wilson (6/6) Oct 10 2003 The following statement
• Daniel Yokomiso (8/14) Oct 10 2003 In Eiffel it's common to dump all the stack values when a contract fails...
• Nicolas Repiquet (15/21) Oct 10 2003 What about :
• J Anderson (6/13) Oct 10 2003 I discussed a printf style assert.
• Philippe Mori (8/13) Oct 13 2003 trace a static_assert?).
• J Anderson (5/30) Oct 14 2003 Exactly my sentiments (except for the disable part, asserts and

"Matthew Wilson" <matthew stlsoft.org> writes:

The following statement

            assert(0 == strcmp(&path[2], pathCheck));

asserts, but does not print out the values of path and pathCheck. It would
be nice to know what they are. (Maybe I need a debugger!)

Someone mentioned a richer assert recently. I'm now convinced.

Ideas?

"Daniel Yokomiso" <daniel_yokomiso yahoo.com.br> writes:

"Matthew Wilson" <matthew stlsoft.org> escreveu na mensagem
news:bm618c$3118$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 The following statement

             assert(0 == strcmp(&path[2], pathCheck));

 asserts, but does not print out the values of path and pathCheck. It would
 be nice to know what they are. (Maybe I need a debugger!)

 Someone mentioned a richer assert recently. I'm now convinced.

 Ideas?

In Eiffel it's common to dump all the stack values when a contract fails, so
you can see the entire call stack, local variables and bound parameters.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.524 / Virus Database: 321 - Release Date: 7/10/2003

"Nicolas Repiquet" <deadcow-remove-this free.fr> writes:

"Matthew Wilson" <matthew stlsoft.org> a écrit dans le message news:
bm618c$3118$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 The following statement

             assert(0 == strcmp(&path[2], pathCheck));

 asserts, but does not print out the values of path and pathCheck. It would
 be nice to know what they are. (Maybe I need a debugger!)

 Someone mentioned a richer assert recently. I'm now convinced.

 Ideas?

What about :

assert(
  ( 0 == strcmp(&path[2], pathCheck) ) &&
  printf("'%.*s' and  '%.*s' are not equal",&path[2],pathCheck)
);

or maybe a alternative assert syntax :

assert( expression ; string_expression );

where String expression become the AssertException's message.

assert(
  0 == strcmp(&path[2], pathCheck);
  "'" ~ &path[2] ~ "' and  '" ~ pathCheck ~ "' are not equal"
);

-- Nicolas Repiquet

J Anderson <anderson badmama.com.au.REMOVE> writes:

Matthew Wilson wrote:

The following statement

            assert(0 == strcmp(&path[2], pathCheck));

asserts, but does not print out the values of path and pathCheck. It would
be nice to know what they are. (Maybe I need a debugger!)

Someone mentioned a richer assert recently. I'm now convinced.

Ideas?



  

I discussed a printf style assert.

assert(<condition>, ...);

ie

assert(0 == strcmp(&path[2], pathCheck), "path (%.s) was not equal to pathCheck
(%.s)", &path[2], pathCheck);

Although stack tracing and debugging has it's advantages (can you stack trace a
static_assert?).

"Philippe Mori" <philippe_mori hotmail.com> writes:

 I discussed a printf style assert.

 assert(<condition>, ...);

 ie

 assert(0 == strcmp(&path[2], pathCheck), "path (%.s) was not equal to

pathCheck (%.s)", &path[2], pathCheck);
 Although stack tracing and debugging has it's advantages (can you stack

trace a static_assert?).

Having both is still better (and ideally it should be possible to disable
them.

And printing a string would also0 be usefull for static assert...

Using a string expression, one can display exactly what he wants to know if
the condition fails.

Philippe

J Anderson <anderson badmama.com.au.REMOVE> writes:

Philippe Mori wrote:

I discussed a printf style assert.

assert(<condition>, ...);

ie

assert(0 == strcmp(&path[2], pathCheck), "path (%.s) was not equal to
    

pathCheck (%.s)", &path[2], pathCheck);
  

Although stack tracing and debugging has it's advantages (can you stack
    

trace a static_assert?).
  

    

Having both is still better (and ideally it should be possible to disable
them.

And printing a string would also0 be usefull for static assert...

Using a string expression, one can display exactly what he wants to know if
the condition fails.

Philippe


  

Exactly my sentiments (except for the disable part, asserts and 
stack-traces are already disabled for release build). Particularly when 
tracing a static assert is non-sensical (as I hinted before).

-Anderson