Re: Charles container library usage examples

[David Trudgett <wpower@zeta.org.au.nospamplease>]

Bj�rn Persson <spam-away@nowhere.nil> writes:

>
> The Ada compiler can omit checks if it can prove that they will never
> fail. While even the C compiler can optimize away code that will never
> have any effect, I would think it's a lot more difficult to prove that
> a hand-coded run-time check is unnecessary when the compiler doesn't
> know what it's for.

Fair enough, that sounds plausible. Of course, if one were writing
checking code in C, for instance, one would probably surround it with
IFDEFs so it could be manually excluded after testing. Not as granular
and tidy, perhaps, as automatic suppression of redundant checks, but
similar, nonetheless.

Cheers,

David



-- 

David Trudgett
http://www.zeta.org.au/~wpower/

Omnis enim res, quae dando non deficit, dum habetur
     et non datur, nondum habetur, quomodo habenda est.

For if a thing is not diminished by being shared with others,
     it is not rightly owned if it is only owned and not shared.

Book I, Chapter 1 "De doctrina christiana"
"Corpus Christianorum", "Series latina", Vol. 32, p. 6, lines 10-11.
Written 397 AD by Saint Augustinus