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

On Wed, 2008-06-18 at 04:40 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2008-06-17 19:13:22 -0700, David Glasser wrote:
> > Doesn't help. (Return types.)
>
> Hmm... I forgot the return. Now, even without considering assertions,
> there's a problem: how does Subversion's standard error reporting
> mechanism can work with void functions?

We don't write a void function if it might return an error.

However, we do have some functions (typically string functions) which
always work if passed valid inputs. Some of these are the most common
places for assertion failures because the definition of "valid input" is
kind of picky.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-06-18 17:46:29 CEST