Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 3960870
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 20, 20262026-05-20T02:54:25+00:00 2026-05-20T02:54:25+00:00

Most of my classes have debug variables, and this makes them often look like

  • 0

Most of my classes have debug variables, and this makes them often look like this:

class A
{
    // stuff
#ifndef NDEBUG
    int check = 0;
#endif
};

and methods might look like this:

for (/* big loop */) {
    // code
#ifndef NDEBUG
    check += x;
#endif
}

assert(check == 100);

Few things are uglier than all those #ifndef NDEBUG’s. Unfortunately no compiler I know can optimize the check variable away without these #ifndefs (I don’t know if that’s even allowed).

So I’ve tried to come up with a solution that would make my life easier. Here’s how it looks now:

#ifndef NDEBUG

#define DEBUG_VAR(T) T

#else

template <typename T>
struct nullclass {
    inline void operator+=(const T&) const {}
    inline const nullclass<T>& operator+(const T&) const { return *this; }
    // more no-op operators...
};

#define DEBUG_VAR(T) nullclass<T>

#endif

So in debug mode, DEBUG_VAR(T) just makes a T. Otherwise it makes a “null class” with only no-ops. And my code would look like this:

class A {
   // stuff
   DEBUG_VAR(int) check;
};

Then I could just use check as if it were a normal variable! Awesome! However, there are still 2 problems that I cannot get solved:

1. It only works with int, float, etc.

The “null class” doesn’t have push_back() etc. No biggie. Most debug variables are ints anyway.

2. The “null class” is 1 char wide!!

Every class in C++ is at least 1 char wide. So even in release mode, a class that uses N debug vars will be at least N chars too big. This is in my eyes just unacceptable. It’s against the zero-overhead principle which I aim for as much as I can.

So, how do I fix this second problem? Is it even possible to get rid of the #ifndef NDEBUG’s without hurting performance in non-debug mode? I accept any good solution, even if it’s your darkest C++ wizardry or C++0x.

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-20T02:54:25+00:00Added an answer on May 20, 2026 at 2:54 am

    How about:

    #ifndef NDEBUG
    #define DEBUG_VAR(T) static nullclass<T>
    #endif
    

    Now no additional storage is added to a class where DEBUG_VAR(T) is used as a member, but the declared identifier can still be used as though it were a member.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

It seems like most examples of JPA/Hibernate entity bean classes I've seen do no
When are custom Exception classes most-valuable? Are there cases when they should or should
Most of my C/C++ development involves monolithic module files and absolutely no classes whatsoever,
Most program languages have some kind of exception handling; some languages have return codes,
Most mature C++ projects seem to have an own reflection and attribute system ,
Most of the implementations I find require a hardware instruction to do this. However
Most of the MVC samples I have seen pass an instance of the view
Most of my users have email addresses associated with their profile in /etc/passwd .
I have some code which is a standalone java application comprising of 30+ classes.
I have an Offer class (NSManagedObject subclass) that I want to use to handle

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.