| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Assert for frontend programs? |
| Date: | 2012-12-16 14:56:01 |
| Message-ID: | 50CDE101.5000805@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 12/16/2012 01:29 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-12-14 at 17:03 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Having the layer is a good thing, eg so that USE_ASSERT_CHECKING
>> can control it, or so that somebody can inject a different behavior
>> if they want.
> You could also (or at least additionally) map !USE_ASSERT_CHECKING to
> NDEBUG. This would also help with imported code that calls assert()
> directly.
We should probably do that for both frontend and backend code, no? That
would get rid of potential problems we already have like inet_net_pton.c
that I noted the other day.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavan Deolasee | 2012-12-16 15:27:09 | Re: Set visibility map bit after HOT prune |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2012-12-16 14:55:41 | Re: logical decoding - GetOldestXmin |