On Saturday 06 June 2015 10:20:56 René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> On Saturday June 06 2015 00:36:14 Thiago Macieira wrote:
>
> Yes, I noticed that Qt4 doesn't use the system harfbuzz for whatever reason.
> >> As asked in the bug report below: is it necessary to handle this
> >> situation
> >> with an assert/abort, instead of simply returning (with whatever error
> >> the
> >> void function in question can return)?
> >
> >The assert is inside HB, so it's not our choice.
>
> Isn't that a bit easy if you're shipping an old version that is no longer
> maintained? Seems the least one could do in this particular case is to
> ensure that in release mode the stuff is built with -DNDEBUG to deactivate
> the assert() side-effects (and "take it like a man" when that leads to
> other crashes and bug reports :) )
If you're hitting an assert, disabling the assert will make the problem worse.
It means code will assume that the assert succeeded and proceed to make
decisions on it.
Example:
assert(ptr);
ptr->i = 0;
Anyway, if this code is in the old hardbuzz-non-NG, what is preventing us from
switching to NG?
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
