code, isolate it behind a well defined (and well documented) interface.</p>
<p>In practice, this means that you shouldn't assume much about the host
-compiler, including its support for "high tech" features like partial
-specialization of templates. If these features are used, they should only be
-an implementation detail of a library which has a simple exposed API.</p>
+compiler, and Visual Studio tends to be the lowest common denominator.
+If advanced features are used, they should only be an implementation detail of
+a library which has a simple exposed API, and preferably be buried in
+libSystem.</p>
</div>
</pre>
</div>
+<p>Another issue is that values used only by assertions will produce an "unused
+ value" warning when assertions are disabled. For example, this code will warn:
+</p>
+
+<div class="doc_code">
+<pre>
+ unsigned Size = V.size();
+ assert(Size > 42 && "Vector smaller than it should be");
+
+ bool NewToSet = Myset.insert(Value);
+ assert(NewToSet && "The value shouldn't be in the set yet");
+</pre>
+</div>
+
+<p>These are two interesting different cases: in the first case, the call to
+V.size() is only useful for the assert, and we don't want it executed when
+assertions are disabled. Code like this should move the call into the assert
+itself. In the second case, the side effects of the call must happen whether
+the assert is enabled or not. In this case, the value should be cast to void
+to disable the warning. To be specific, it is preferred to write the code
+like this:</p>
+
+<div class="doc_code">
+<pre>
+ assert(V.size() > 42 && "Vector smaller than it should be");
+
+ bool NewToSet = Myset.insert(Value); (void)NewToSet;
+ assert(NewToSet && "The value shouldn't be in the set yet");
+</pre>
+</div>
+
+
</div>
<!-- _______________________________________________________________________ -->