Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!mcgill-vision!snorkelwacker!apple!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!wuarchive!udel!haven!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: ANSI assert
Keywords: assert, NDEBUG
Message-ID: <13830@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 12 Sep 90 19:33:18 GMT
References: <1428@proto.COM> <3726@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au> <17964@haddock.ima.isc.com>
Followup-To: alt.lang.cfutures
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD.
Lines: 12

In article <17964@haddock.ima.isc.com> karl@kelp.ima.isc.com (Karl Heuer) writes:
>So anyway, I would now propose the following:
>In addition to ``assert'', <assert.h> shall define the macro ``require'',

I would like to suggest that all proposals for additions beyond the turf
already staked out by the C standard be done using new headers, since the
#includer of one of the standard headers now knows that it is safe to, e.g.,
freely use the identifier "require" in his current programs, and it would
be horrible for any future revision of the C standard to make changes that
would invalidate currently strictly conforming code.  (Unless a very strong
case could be made for the necessity of that, but clearly there is no strong
necessity of adding unreserved stuff to existing standard headers.)