C++ Logo


Advanced search

Re: [wg14/wg21 liaison] [isocpp-lib-ext] P2264/N2829 make assert() macro user friendly was adopted for C23

From: Peter Sommerlad (C++) <"Peter>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2022 20:56:09 +0100
I am just wondering what legwork I still have to do for C++.

With C, it seems my work is done, and I think with the reasoning given
today at WG14, implementors could even make it a bug fix for previous
language standards without much hassle (actually conforming to the
pre-existing specification in the case of no NDEBUG).

However, I am lost about what I have to do to get it into some future or
even previous C++ standard (as a bug fix)?

I have seen so many things falling between the cracks that I am honestly
curious and careful.


Ville Voutilainen wrote on 17.02.22 20:51:
> On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 at 21:40, Niall Douglas via Lib-Ext
> <lib-ext_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> On 17/02/2022 19:12, Peter Sommerlad (C++) via Lib-Ext wrote:
>>> OK, can we put the paper in the C++26 track in the hope someone will
>>> write a paper to make C++26 based on C23?
>> You could raise it as a defect against the 23 IS under the same basis as
>> WG14's choice?
>> I'm pretty sure implementers would prefer that both C and C++'s assert()
>> are the same, anyway.
> Well, technically, mimic the way C specifies it - they specify it
> as-if it's a function. Then the weasel-wording
> about NDEBUG explains how it behaves in different modes, and the
> practical implementation is as in your paper,
> Peter.

Peter Sommerlad
Better Software: Consulting, Training, Reviews
Modern, Safe & Agile C++
+41 79 432 23 32

Received on 2022-02-17 19:56:13