Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 25 Jun 1999 22:56:38 +0100 (GMT) | From | Riley Williams <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] *(int*)0 = 0 & variations |
| |
Hi Horst.
>>>>> 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.
It's good to have the official viewpoint.
Best wishes from Riley.
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | There is something frustrating about the quality and speed of Linux | | development, ie., the quality is too high and the speed is too high, | | in other words, I can implement this XXXX feature, but I bet someone | | else has already done so and is just about to release their patch. | +----------------------------------------------------------------------+ * ftp://ftp.MemAlpha.cx/pub/rhw/Linux * http://www.MemAlpha.cx/kernel.versions.html
- 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/
| |