我承认使用了断言，但没有考虑适当的错误报告。然而，这并不意味着它们在正确使用时是非常有用的。

They are especially useful for if you want to follow the "Crash Early" principle. For example suppose you're implementing a reference counting mechanism. At certain locations in your code you know that the refcount should be zero or one. And also suppose that if the refcount is wrong the program won't crash immediately but during the next message loop at which point it will be difficult to find out why things went wrong. An assert would have been helpful in detecting the error closer to its origin.

按照这种逻辑，断点也是邪恶的。

断言应该用作调试辅助，而不是其他。“邪恶”是当你试图使用它们而不是错误处理时。

断言的存在是为了帮助程序员检测和修复不可能存在的问题，并验证您的假设是否正确。

它们与错误处理无关，但不幸的是，一些程序员滥用它们，然后宣称它们是“邪恶的”。

不，只要您按照预期使用assert，它就没有错。

也就是说，它应该用于在调试期间捕捉“不可能发生”的情况，而不是正常的错误处理。

断言:程序逻辑本身的失败。 错误处理:错误的输入或系统状态，不是由于程序中的错误造成的。

作为附加信息，go提供了一个内置函数panic。这可以用来代替assert。如。

if x < 0 {
    panic("x is less than 0");
}

Panic将打印堆栈跟踪，因此在某种程度上它具有assert的目的。

我承认使用了断言，但没有考虑适当的错误报告。然而，这并不意味着它们在正确使用时是非常有用的。

They are especially useful for if you want to follow the "Crash Early" principle. For example suppose you're implementing a reference counting mechanism. At certain locations in your code you know that the refcount should be zero or one. And also suppose that if the refcount is wrong the program won't crash immediately but during the next message loop at which point it will be difficult to find out why things went wrong. An assert would have been helpful in detecting the error closer to its origin.

简短的回答:不，我相信断言可能有用