Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WsA4J-00024t-E6 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 04 Jun 2014 12:13:23 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.213.173 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.213.173; envelope-from=laanwj@gmail.com; helo=mail-ig0-f173.google.com; Received: from mail-ig0-f173.google.com ([209.85.213.173]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1WsA4H-0006El-H3 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 04 Jun 2014 12:13:23 +0000 Received: by mail-ig0-f173.google.com with SMTP id hn18so6168171igb.12 for ; Wed, 04 Jun 2014 05:13:15 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.92.42 with SMTP id cj10mr6583913igb.34.1401883995680; Wed, 04 Jun 2014 05:13:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.60.195 with HTTP; Wed, 4 Jun 2014 05:13:15 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <538EF81D.9060301@stud.uni-saarland.de> References: <1401822421.27942.YahooMailNeo@web124505.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <538EF81D.9060301@stud.uni-saarland.de> Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 14:13:15 +0200 Message-ID: From: Wladimir To: Jannis Froese Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b10d0b594415104fb018dde X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (laanwj[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1WsA4H-0006El-H3 Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] # error "Bitcoin cannot be compiled without assertions." <<< List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2014 12:13:23 -0000 --047d7b10d0b594415104fb018dde Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:42 PM, Jannis Froese < s9jafroe@stud.uni-saarland.de> wrote: > I think most concerns about the current use of asserts would be resolved > if the currently used asserts would be changed to a nicer definition which > is independent of NDEBUG, and a second class of debugging asserts would be > introduced, which is exclusively for expensive, redundant checks and is > disabled by NDEBUG. > Sounds good to me. Wladimir --047d7b10d0b594415104fb018dde Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8

On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:42 PM, Jannis Froese <s9jafroe@stud.uni-saarland.de> wrote:
I think most concerns about the current use of asserts would be resolved if the currently used asserts would be changed to a nicer definition which is independent of NDEBUG, and a second class of debugging asserts would be introduced, which is exclusively for expensive, redundant checks and is disabled by NDEBUG.

Sounds good to me.

Wladimir
--047d7b10d0b594415104fb018dde--