Re: -DDISABLE_ENABLE_ASSERT

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 8:15 AM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> That means you're for a (differently named) disable macro? Or is it not
>> recent enough that you don't care?

> I'm leaning toward thinking we should just rip it out.  The fact that
> 3 out of the 4 people commenting on this thread have used it at some
> point provides some evidence that it has more than no value - but on
> the other hand, there's a cost to keeping it around.

Yeah.  For the record, I've used it too (don't recall what for exactly).
But I don't think it's worth adding yet another layer of complication for.

The main argument for it given in this thread is recompile cost ...
but TBH, I have one word for anybody who's worried about that, and
that word is "ccache".  If you don't have that tool installed, you're
missing out on a huge timesaver.
        regards, tom lane