Subject: Re: switch to two-argument KASSERT?
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Ben Harris <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 01/15/2004 13:13:06
In article <20040114050458.GA20584@che.ojctech.com> you write:
>In response to a recent commit, several folks tell me that they would
>like to see our one-argument KASSERT change to a two-argument KASSERT
>similar to FreeBSD's. The second argument is a message that describes
>what went wrong.
I think a two-argument version would be good, if only because it makes it
easy to add printing of the values that triggered the assertion failure. On
the other hand, I think something equivalent to the current KASSERT should
be kept, since it's easier to use, and making it easy to add random
assertions (even if they do turn out a bit cryptic) is important. I'd kind
of prefer it if the current KASSERT kept its name, just to minimise thrash
in the source tree and keep old patches valid.
Ben Harris <bjh21@NetBSD.org>
Portmaster, NetBSD/acorn26 <URL:http://www.NetBSD.org/Ports/acorn26/>