Greg Stein wrote on Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 13:19:41 -0400:
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 04:33, Julian Foad <julianf...@btopenworld.com> wrote:
> > Greg Stein wrote:
> >> Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> >>> gst...@apache.org wrote:
> >>>> +svn_ra_serf__copy_into_spillbuf(svn_spillbuf_t **spillbuf,
> >>>> + serf_bucket_t *bkt,
> >>>> + apr_pool_t *result_pool,
> >>>> + apr_pool_t *scratch_pool)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + status = serf_bucket_read(bkt, SERF_READ_ALL_AVAIL, &data, &len);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* ### we should throw an error, if the bucket does. */
> >>>> + SVN_ERR_ASSERT(status == APR_SUCCESS || status == APR_EOF);
> >>>
> >>> Can we please avoid these in new code?
> >>
> >> Why?
> >
> > Hi Greg. I'm puzzled by your response. You wrote "### we should throw an
> > error" -- and now you're asking Daniel why?
>
> Daniel removed one of these ASSERT uses a day or two ago. My
> assumption was that he was referring to that, rather than the ###.
>
Yes, by "these" I referred to to the use of assert(), abort(), and
svn_error__malfunction().
