Re: turning g_assert* into warnings

Am Freitag, den 12.10.2007, 11:52 +0200 schrieb Tim Janik:
> note that in practice, this shouldn't change anything for programmers
> (except for the ability to write better code ;)
> because of G_DISABLE_ASSERT, programmers can already not rely on
> failing assertions to abort their programs (only g_error will reliably
> do that).

I was in strict "HELL, NO!" mode until I read this reasoning. Still I am
not sure if G_DISABLE_ASSERT is a misfeature, since when using g_assert*
instead of g_return* or g_warning you usually really have no good
fallback strategy and therefore accept the program crashing.

So for better error handling I'd suggest keeping the old and boring "if
(blub) { g_warning ... } paradigm.

Also remember that such a dramatic that (external) programmers most
certainly  do not expect their program to continue after a failed
assertion (despite  the G_DISABLE_ASSERT misfeature). So not calling
abort on failed assertions could make the program eat little children,
if not worse.

So I guess what you really want is some kind of "g_soft_assert" or some

Mathias Hasselmann <mathias hasselmann gmx de>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]