Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] *(int*)0 = 0 & variations | Date | Thu, 24 Jun 1999 22:09:34 -0400 | From | Horst von Brand <> |
| |
Riley Williams <rhw@MemAlpha.CX> said:
[...]
> >>>> +#else > >>>> +#define kassert(cond) (void) abs(cond) > >>>> +#define kassertoops(cond) (void) abs(cond) > >>>> +#endif
> >>> Any code depending on assert evaluating the condition is broken > >>> IMHO.
It _is_ broken. See the page for assert(3). People _will_ go and delete kassert(9) calls, and blow up the whole thing.
> >> IMHO also, but the general concensus appears to be in favour > >> of it. [...]
Don't let "consensus" make you stray from the right path. -- Horst von Brand vonbrand@sleipnir.valparaiso.cl Casilla 9G, Viña del Mar, Chile +56 32 672616
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |