[reSIProcate] More problems with `assert'

[Jason Fischl]

On 11/6/06, Daniel Pocock <daniel at readytechnology.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>
> Jason Fischl wrote:
>
> > On 11/6/06, Daniel Pocock <daniel at readytechnology.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> There is also a side issue on the use of assert: perhaps it would be
> >> useful to have a configure option at compile time to decide if we want
> >> to use assert() in a strict manner, or we would prefer to use `lazy'
> >> alternative code that just logs an error and tries to carry on where
> >> genuinely feasible.
> >>
> >> This already exists. If you build with optimization CODE_OPTIMIZE=1,
> the
> >
> > asserts are compiled out. Only the debug builds have assertions enabled.
>
> It's not quite the same thing - the asserts are compiled out, but no
> warnings or log messages are given in their place.


I think this is the correct behavior in a production system.

I'm not questioning the legitimacy of putting the asserts in the first
> place - they are very valuable and show very clearly where problems may
> occur - I'm just looking at practical ways of getting useful feedback
> from systems that are in a production environment.


In my opinion, you should not be putting log messages in production systems
that log programmer errors. This leads to a potential attack on the system.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.resiprocate.org/pipermail/resiprocate-devel/attachments/20061106/bff9c8b9/attachment.htm>