Menu
I am refactoring some MFC code that is littered with ASSERT statements, and in preparation for a future Linux port I want to replace them with the standard assert. Are there any significant differences between the two implementations that people know of that could bite me on the backside?
Similarly, I have also come across some code that uses ATLASSERT which I would also like to replace.
482
static_assert is meant to make compilation fail with the specified message, while traditional assert is meant to end the execution of your program.
An assertion statement specifies a condition that you expect to be true at a point in your program. If that condition is not true, the assertion fails, execution of your program is interrupted, and the Assertion Failed dialog box appears.
Exceptions versus assertions Use assert statements to test for conditions during development that should never be true if all your code is correct. There's no point in handling such an error by using an exception, because the error indicates that something in the code has to be fixed.
The assert() function tests the condition parameter. If it is false, it prints a message to standard error, using the string parameter to describe the failed condition. It then sets the variable _assert_exit to one and executes the exit statement.
No. The MFC version just includes an easy to debug break point.
61
Replace them with your own assertion macro. That's how you get the most benefit out of it (logging, stack trace, etc.)
45
I would recommend either using your own macro, or #define's for the linux compilation. There's no compelling reason to give up any extra helpfulness on the Windows side (eg: built-in breakpoint), and no compelling reason to change a lot of code when some simple compatibility #define's will suffice.
41
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With
