Hi
On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 2:56 PM Daniel P. Berrangé <berra...@redhat.com>
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 11:09:37AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote:
> > On 07/03/2022 11.06, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 02:51:23PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 05:49:18PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > > > > The QMP commands have a trailing newline, but the response does
> not.
> > > > > This makes the qtest logs hard to follow as the next QMP command
> > > > > appears in the same line as the previous QMP response.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berra...@redhat.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > tests/qtest/libqtest.c | 3 +++
> > > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/tests/qtest/libqtest.c b/tests/qtest/libqtest.c
> > > > > index a85f8a6d05..79c3edcf4b 100644
> > > > > --- a/tests/qtest/libqtest.c
> > > > > +++ b/tests/qtest/libqtest.c
> > > > > @@ -629,6 +629,9 @@ QDict *qmp_fd_receive(int fd)
> > > > > }
> > > > > json_message_parser_feed(&qmp.parser, &c, 1);
> > > > > }
> > > > > + if (log) {
> > > > > + g_assert(write(2, "\n", 1) == 1);
> > > > > + }
> > > >
> > > > Drop the g_assert() to remove side effect of G_DISABLE_ASSERT?
> > >
> > > You need to check the return value of write() otherwise you'll get a
> > > compile failure due to a warn_unused_result attribute annotation.
> > >
> > > I don't think G_DISABLE_ASSERT is a problem as we're not defining
> > > that in our code.
> >
> > You could use g_assert_true() - that's not affected by G_DISABLE_ASSERT.
>
> I don't think we need to do that, per existing common practice:
>
> $ git grep '\bg_assert(' | wc -l
> 2912
>
> $ git grep '\bg_assert(' tests | wc -l
> 2296
>
>
On the topic of assert() usage, it would be nice to state clearly when to
assert() or g_assert().
g_assert() behaviour is claimed to be more consistent than assert() across
platforms.
Also -DNDEBUG is less obvious than -DG_DISABLE_CHECKS or -DG_DISABLE_ASSERT.
I would remove assert.h and prevent from using it back, but I might be
missing some reasons to still use it.
--
Marc-André Lureau
