Acces Violation: assert with null instance

[Lionello Lunesu]

Stewart Gordon wrote:
> Frits van Bommel wrote:
>> Stewart Gordon wrote:
>>> For some strange reason, assert on an object reference checks that 
>>> the invariants are satisfied instead of that the reference isn't 
>>> null. There's nothing to this effect in the spec, so I don't know how 
>>> it came about.  While it may be useful, it certainly shouldn't do it 
>>> _instead of_ checking it isn't null.
>>
>> As I commented recently when this bug was added to bugzilla, it's in 
>> the spec. It's just not where you'd expect it.
> 
> What is the Bugzilla issue number?  I can't seem to find it.

796

>> It's noted at http://www.digitalmars.com/d/class.html#invariants (the 
>> section on class invariants) instead of in the section on asserts.
>> I've since added a warning about this on the comments page for the 
>> page containing the section on asserts.
>>
>> Also, the null check *is* in the code, but when Phobos is compiled in 
>> release mode (which the pre-compiled version is) the assert isn't 
>> performed...
> 
> "The invariant can be checked when a class object is the argument to an 
> assert() expression, as:"
> 
> I see this as giving an _additional_ use of assert, something that 
> assert on a class object may do as an extra.  The general contract of 
> assert is supposed to remain, and the fact that out of the box it 
> doesn't certainly constitutes a bug, at least IMO.

I agree, that why I filed that bug :)

L.