On Mon, 12 Nov 2001, Takashi Iwai wrote: > I agree that the function should return instead of terminate the > program.
Yes, a library should never terminate a program - worst offender is exit(), but assert() is the same. > One conern is whether to put a warning/error message when an invalid > argument is given. It's helpful but sometime annoying. Its annoying if you dont do a debugging session. Good error reporting via the returnvalue is sufficient (of course the program needs to check for errors). > Adding another macro (like snd_assert in alsa-driver) instead of > standard assert? The behavior can be dependent upon the compile > condition, i.e. with full debug message, return only, replaced with > the normal assert macro, or even ignored. I'd call it snd_check_arg() then - as this is the intended use. Maybe look at the guile argument checking macros where you specify the check, the argument position and its name. So you'd have #define snd_check_arg(arg, arg_pos, expr, ...) ... Maybe for really "we're lost" situations inside alsa have a snd_panic() macro that dies with an appropriate error message (but not assert(0) like I see in many places). Richard. -- Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> WWW: http://www.tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de/~rguenth/ The GLAME Project: http://www.glame.de/ _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/alsa-devel
