Kay Ramme - Sun Germany - Hamburg wrote:
Stephan Bergmann wrote:
On unxsoli4 and unxsols4 PRODUCT builds, OSL_VERIFY(a == b) causes a
spurious warning "The result of a comparison is unused" (because the
argument of OSL_VERIFY is always executed, even for OSL_DEBUG_LEVEL ==
0). Instead of disabling the corresponding unxsoli4 and unxsols4
warning, I would vote to change code
OSL_VERIFY(e);
to
if (!e) {
OSL_ASSERT(false);
}
(and thus work around the warning) on the ground that OSL_VERIFY is
dangerous and confusing---unlike the other OSL diagnose functions, it
*does* evaluate its argument for OSL_DEBUG_LEVEL == 0. In the
interest of the "least surprise" principle, we IMO should deprecate
OSL_VERIFY and replace all its occurrences as described above.
Sorry for the (may be stupid) question, but why not just change
OSL_VERIFY to emit nothing, in case OSL_DEBUG_LEVEL == 0? I would expect
that only weird code would relay on the evaluation in case of a zero
debug level. And these case can probably easily be changed to something
with "assert" (or ensure).
No, the code I saw was of the form
OSL_VERIFY(close(f) >= 0);
And when we are on it, what are the differences / purposes between
- OSL_VERIFY
- OSL_ENSURE
- OSL_ASSERT
? Couldn't we consolidate to just _one_ macro. E.g. OSL_ENSURE because
of the passed message?
Maybe we could, but *not* on CWS warnings01. We already have enough to
do here to get rid of all warnings. If we take the burden of any
additional clean up (like unifying OSL_ENSURE and OSL_ASSERT) that is
not directly necessary to get rid of warnings, we will drown.
-Stephan
-Stephan
Kay
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
