On 11/21/2011 01:30 PM, Caolán McNamara wrote:
On Fri, 2011-11-18 at 15:25 +0100, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
Alright, so we end up with
use assert if you want an assert
SAL_WARN if you want to warn about something odd, but which isn't
necessarily definitely wrong
SAL_INFO for verbose logging
Practical question though, is on windows where does the output go ?
SAL_INFO/WARN just go to stderr for now. What should work to see them
even for a gui soffice.exe is to add something like 2>log.txt to the
command line. Not sure if there is enough of a Windows developer base
that demands a more sophisticated solution? (One could extend the
SAL_LOG environment variable, so that a trailing ">file" part would
append the data to a given file, for example. Or see to hook up Window'
OutputDebugString.)
Should we write off all the DBG_ASSERTs as hopeless to unwind and mass
convert them all to SAL_WARNs ?
I would initially file an easy hack to do the conversion. If that does
not lead to clean-up in a reasonable time-frame, I would suggest to
mass-convert the remainder to SAL_WARN.
How do we feel about code that does e.g.
assert(pFoo);
if (!pFoo)
throw catchAbleFoo("wtf");
i.e. do we have a philosophical problem with gracefully/semi-gracefully
handing should-be impossible cases ?
I think that's a perversion, and should be avoided. It the author could
not convince himself that !pFoo is not impossible (modulo bugs), then he
should use OSL_WARN instead. If however he *is* convinced that !pFoo is
impossible absent any bugs, but argues that if there *are* bugs, the
added if statement adds some sort of safety, I would counter-argue that
this alleged safety net pointlessly increases complexity and is probably
full of holes and inconsistencies anyway (as it is likely an extremely
untested code path).
Such defensive programming IMO would need to be architected into the
code from the beginning. It makes little sense to add such things
locally just here and there. And I'm not even convinced LO is an
application for which an elaborate defensive programming architecture
would be justified. If there is a bug, crash early. (One thing we
could IMO improve though, is to not rely on trying to save open
documents from within a signal handler, but instead rely on frequent
auto-save and roll back to the last saved version after a crash.)
Stephan
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
