On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 at 20:51, Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lur...@redhat.com> wrote: > > Hi > > On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 9:06 PM Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> wrote: >> I think that improving the quality of the failure reporting >> in 'make check' is useful, and that we should probably turn >> on g_test_set_nonfatal_assertions() everywhere. (The worst that >> can happen is that instead of crashing on the assert we proceed >> and crash a bit later, I think.) Awkwardly we don't have a single >> place where we could put that call, so I guess it's a coccinelle >> script to add it to every test's main() function. >> > > I don't have any strong opinion on this. But I don't see much sense in > having extra code for things that should never happen.
The point is that I want to make them happen, though... > I would teach coverity instead that those asserts are always fatal. If you want an assert that's always fatal, that's g_assert(). These ones are documented as not always fatal. > Fwiw, none of the tests in glib or gtk seem to use > g_test_set_nonfatal_assertions(), probably for similar considerations. That's interesting. I did wonder about these APIs, and if glib themselves aren't using them that seems like a reason why they're so awkward. thanks -- PMM
