2013/4/30 John Emmas <[email protected]> > On 30/04/2013 07:41, Konstantin Ritt wrote: > >> Hi Behdad, >> >> John is probably right, having DEBUG macro defined in release mode could >> potentially lead to a hard-tracking issues. And this possibility grows when >> we're compiling Harfbuzz in instead of linking to it. >> Maybe worth of renaming to HB_DEBUG? >> >> > Thanks for supporting me on this, Konstantin. > > In defence of Harfbuzz I should emphasize that at present, there's > absolutely no problem with the custom macro. It gets defined in > 'hb-private.hh' which is never exposed through any of the public header > files. However, my fear is that this is the kind of thing which tends to > get get forgotten over time. In the future, somebody could take the macro > out of 'hb-private.hh' and innocuously move it to some other header file - > where it could end up causing havoc. I totally agree with renaming it to > HB_DEBUG. Otherwise, there's effectively an accident waiting to happen.
True. But in case Harfbuzz gets compiled-in, DEBUG might be defined outside of hb-private.hh, leading to HB build failure. Kind regards, Konstantin > > > John > _______________________________________________ > HarfBuzz mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/harfbuzz >
_______________________________________________ HarfBuzz mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/harfbuzz
