[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: abort or verify?

From: Jani Averbach <jaa_at_jaa.iki.fi>
Date: 2004-11-10 04:47:28 CET

On 2004-11-10 03:29+0000, Julian Foad wrote:
> My reasons were:
> 1) Consistency: we should use one or the other, with few exceptions.


> 2) Informative message when the condition arises.


> 3) Neatness (tidiness) of source code.


> 4) Not checking for bugs while running a release build.

-1.0, so now we have a nice relaese build which smiles and purrs to
you all the time, but could corrupt your data behind your back? Sweet.

> Let me propose to use "verify" instead of "assert", where "verify" is
> defined to be the same as "assert" except that it is always enabled (i.e.
> even when NDEBUG is defined). This will achieve points (1), (2) and (3),
> and will leave the checks active all the time.
> Would this be acceptable to everyone?


BR, Jani

Jani Averbach
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Nov 10 04:47:44 2004

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.