From: Nathan C. <co...@bu...> - 2003-02-25 18:37:22
|
I've noticed that in a lot of places in gaim, there are comments like 'this should never happen', and such. I am wondering why the g_assert(...) function is not used in gaim. It would alert people that these unreachable cases are being reached. IMHO, an assertion is better than just letting the functions return without flagging an error. (I noticed that the following change was commited to dialogs.c today: + if (!who || !*who) { + /* this shouldn't ever happen */ return; } ) -Nathan --=20 Nathan J. Conrad (XXX)-687-7449 http://bungled.net 312 Moore Hall // UNC-C // Charlotte, NC 28223-0001 GPG: F4FC 7E25 9308 ECE1 735C 0798 CE86 DA45 9170 3112 |
From: Ethan B. <ebl...@cs...> - 2003-02-25 18:57:46
|
Nathan Conrad spake unto us the following wisdom: > I've noticed that in a lot of places in gaim, there are comments like > 'this should never happen', and such. I am wondering why the > g_assert(...) function is not used in gaim. It would alert people > that these unreachable cases are being reached. IMHO, an assertion is > better than just letting the functions return without flagging an > error. There should only be assertions in places where the failure would be fatal anyway, but perhaps harder to find. Randomly asserting for things that are not fatal but perhaps not completely correct doesn't buy anyone anything... Although perhaps a debug_printf would be appropriate. > + if (!who || !*who) { > + /* this shouldn't ever happen */ > return; > } In this case, I assume this return statement prevents gaim from doing anything Bad (like crashing) and probably doesn't affect the operation of the program in such a way that a forced crash (assertion) would be superior to silent failure. If silent failure *is* in fact a problem here, this check should not have been made. Ethan --=20 Happiness is a belt-fed weapon. |