On Monday 31 of October 2011, Stephan Bergmann wrote: > For me at least, this implies that all occurrences of firing assertions > should be tracked and fixed. > > (For me at least, this also implies that assertions---OSL_ASSERT, > OSL_ENSURE, OSL_FAIL, DBG_ASSERT---should only be used to flag illegal > program states, not for unexpected but legal ones. I don't think there > is objection to this view in general. I've only seen confusion about > which macro was designed for which use case, and a sort of indifference > a la "half of the time, OSL_ASSERT etc. are used with the wrong > semantics anyway; shrug.")
I think the only feasible way of fixing this is introducing a new set of these macros (let's say LO_WARN, LO_ASSERT), deprecating the old ones and converting their usage to the new ones. Otherwise we'll never know which OSL_ASSERT is really meant to assert and which is just a warning. -- Lubos Lunak l.lu...@suse.cz _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice