[C++] Are ARROW_DCHECK* and DCHECK* interchangeable?

[zanmato1984]

Describe the usage question you have. Please include as many useful details as possible.

Been developing arrow C++ for a while and I've always been wondering if the ARROW_DCHECK* family and the DCHECK* family are interchangeable. It seems like to be the case from the following straight forward definition:

arrow/cpp/src/arrow/util/logging.h

Lines 141 to 148 in 5e451d8

	#define DCHECK ARROW_DCHECK
	#define DCHECK_OK ARROW_DCHECK_OK
	#define DCHECK_EQ ARROW_DCHECK_EQ
	#define DCHECK_NE ARROW_DCHECK_NE
	#define DCHECK_LE ARROW_DCHECK_LE
	#define DCHECK_LT ARROW_DCHECK_LT
	#define DCHECK_GE ARROW_DCHECK_GE
	#define DCHECK_GT ARROW_DCHECK_GT

Or is there any subtle convention around them?

Component(s)

C++

[zeroshade]

The general convention is that when you are utilizing this from outside of internal Arrow code, you should use ARROW_DCHECK_* to indicate where the macro is coming from. This is the same convention for the RETURN_NOT_OK vs ARROW_RETURN_NOT_OK family of functions.

At least that's my understanding.

[zanmato1984]

The general convention is that when you are utilizing this from outside of internal Arrow code, you should use ARROW_DCHECK_* to indicate where the macro is coming from. This is the same convention for the RETURN_NOT_OK vs ARROW_RETURN_NOT_OK family of functions.

At least that's my understanding.

Thanks @zeroshade , that makes much sense. If this is the case, then we should probably put some comments around these macros as a tiny coding guideline.

Let's wait for a while to see if others have any further comments.

[pitrou]

Issue resolved by pull request 43248
#43248