On 02/15/2013 02:01 AM, Peter Krempa wrote: >> So, one could logically believe the check could change to: >> >> sa_assert(fd == -1 || (fd >= 3 && fd <= 8)); Yes, I like that. >>>> ACK with the assertion removed or a sufficient explanation provided. > > I think this is a sufficient explanation, so ACK (as long as sa_assert > has no side effects normally). sa_assert is a no-op when static analysis is not being performed. That's why we prefer it over raw assert(), because sa_assert() does not change based on NDEBUG, only based on toolchain. -- Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list