_GLIBCXX_ASSERT lossage

[Paolo Carlini]

Pétur Runólfsson wrote:

>However, I haven't seen any test case that uses VERIFY, but requires
>that _GLIBCXX_ASSERT should not be defined (I may have missed some
>though) so this seems pretty bogus.
>
Yes, seems bogus to me too, now. Probably, time ago had an actual
use... dunno...

Let's wait a bit for other opinions: I vote in favor of simply removing
the thing and unconditionally having VERIFY equivalent to an assert.

Benjamin?

Paolo.