[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: abort vs. assert
From: |
Paolo Bonzini |
Subject: |
Re: abort vs. assert |
Date: |
Tue, 16 Mar 2010 08:04:46 +0100 |
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 22:36, Bruno Haible <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hi Jim,
>
>> You might just as well define and use your own macro,
>>
>> #define ASSERT(e) do { if (!(e)) abort (); } while (0)
>
> Oh yes, this one is perfectly fine with me.
But it wouldn't protect you from
#define abort __builtin_unreachable
I honestly think you have a solution in search of a problem.
Paolo
- Re: [PATCH] (x)memcoll: performance improvement when input is known to be NUL delimited., Chen Guo, 2010/03/08
- Re: [PATCH] (x)memcoll: performance improvement when input is known to be NUL delimited., Bruno Haible, 2010/03/08
- Re: [PATCH] (x)memcoll: performance improvement when input is known to be NUL delimited., Chen Guo, 2010/03/08
- Re: [PATCH] (x)memcoll: performance improvement when input is known to be NUL delimited., Chen Guo, 2010/03/08
- Re: [PATCH] (x)memcoll: performance improvement when input is known to be NUL delimited., Bruno Haible, 2010/03/14
- Re: [PATCH] (x)memcoll: performance improvement when input is known to be NUL delimited., Paolo Bonzini, 2010/03/15
- Re: [PATCH] (x)memcoll: performance improvement when input is known to be NUL delimited., Jim Meyering, 2010/03/15
- Re: abort vs. assert, Bruno Haible, 2010/03/15
- Re: abort vs. assert, Jim Meyering, 2010/03/15
- Re: abort vs. assert, Bruno Haible, 2010/03/15
- Re: abort vs. assert,
Paolo Bonzini <=
Re: [PATCH] (x)memcoll: performance improvement when input is known to be NUL delimited., Chen Guo, 2010/03/10
Re: [PATCH] (x)memcoll: performance improvement when input is known to be NUL delimited., Bruno Haible, 2010/03/14