This is the mail archive of the
java@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: PR java/16927 [Was Re: PATCH for better assertion control.]
- From: Per Bothner <per at bothner dot com>
- To: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
- Cc: java at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 13:19:28 -0700
- Subject: Re: PR java/16927 [Was Re: PATCH for better assertion control.]
- References: <40526AED.6070807@bothner.com> <40538F72.5030905@bothner.com> <16723.2273.470478.699815@cuddles.cambridge.redhat.com>
Andrew Haley wrote:
The obvious fix is not to generate code for the assertion at all -- it
cannot be executed -- but simply return a null statement. However,
you've gone to some trouble here not to do the "obvious" thing. Is
there a special reason why? Maybe warnings for unused args or
something like that?
As I recall: yes. More generally, to catch errors.
I don't remember the hows and whys of patch_string to know if your
patch is correct. It does seem like a kludge, but so does the
mechanism of patch_string. I don't remember why Alex did it this
way: One would think there must be a cleaner way
--
--Per Bothner
per@bothner.com http://per.bothner.com/