| From: Andrew Cagney <[email protected]> | includes: allow if (!passert(...)) | | mainly so it is easy to switch between pexpect() | and passert(). | | (which is presumably to make debugging easier)
Ahh. The use of a passert as if it returned a value looks like a mistake. It makes unreachable code. I would hope that static analysis tools would warn when they see it. If, during debugging, you want a passert with the same test and location as an existing pexpect, you can easily add the passert without changing the pexpect. In my experience, adding code for debugging is better than changing code for debugging. When you no longer want it, you delete it, rather than having to reversing a change. (Since "make base" on my system didn't whine after my change, there does not seem to be case in HEAD where the value returned by PASSERT is used.) _______________________________________________ Swan-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libreswan.org/mailman/listinfo/swan-dev
