Sverrir, I think we all are at a loss what you are trying to solve here (at least I am).
The code as it is today is as follows: ASSERT(location_ != NULL); ASSERT(reinterpret_cast<Address>(*location_) != kHandleZapValue); What I keep hearing is that you are trying to protect against crashing the second line if location_ is NULL. Can you please explain how you are getting to the second line? The ASSERT on the first line will abort and program execution is stopped. Thanks, -Ivan On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 08:31, Sverrir Á. Berg <[email protected]> wrote: > I did not see any other replies but I understand your holding. I personally > don't think crashing in the assert itself provides any value since > difference in behaviour between debug and release is bad (IMHO). How about: > ASSERT(location_ != NULL); // as before > ASSERT(location_ && reinterpret_cast<Address>(*location_) != > kHandleZapValue); > Best of both worlds? > Sverrir > > > On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 2:13 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> As Søren and Kevin replied, dereferencing a null handle is going to >> crash anyway, so I'd like to keep this a two separate ASSERTS so it is >> easy to see which one of the conjuncts gets hit. >> >> >> http://codereview.chromium.org/113409 > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ v8-dev mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
