27 Jan
2008
27 Jan
'08
4:27 a.m.
Alex wrote:
On 26-Jan-08, at 2:34 PM, Marc Piulachs wrote:
Actually, I'd say the stupidity is in using a runtime assert, when a
compile-time assert will do the trick (not using CPU at runtime, while
enforcing the condition).
Unless memory fails me, in C++ you can implement ct_assert(x) like:
typedef char[x!=0] foo;
as an array of size zero is an error.
How does current C compilers react to typedefs of zero-sized arrays?
Sure, one can't use it exactly as in C++, but it could still be useful
to at least know about this idiom.
Problems should be trapped as early as possible.
--
Mike
Hi,
I'm not very sure about r32018-r32022.
Some compiler warnings are stupid and useless, some others not.
This one is stupid.