Re: [RFC] Replacement for "assert" in the libraries

On Tue, 17 Jun 2008, David Glasser wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 11:00 AM, David Glasser
> <glasser_at_davidglasser.net> wrote:
>> Additionally, assert/abort generally gives good stack traces
>> when run in gdb, whereas it's trickier to track down the source of our
>> error objects.
>
> Hmm, nobody's really responded to this point of mine. Am I seriously
> the only person who appreciates how assert/abort works better with gdb
> than our errors?
>
> Or to the point: does everybody else have some special trick for
> getting the breakpoint at the right place with svn_error_t in gdb that
> I don't know about?

I believe Julian mentioned that you can have both:

#ifdef MAINTAINER_MODE
#define SVN_ASSERT(x) assert(x)
#else
#define SVN_ASSERT(x) if(x) return svn_error_create(...)
#endif

Wouln't that be enough?

Martin

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-06-17 23:49:46 CEST