Re: [PATCH 11/18] worker: use spice_return_if_fail() instead of spice_assert() in release_item

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 06:19:18AM -0500, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
> > If g_return_if_fail() is deemed good-enough here, why not use it now and
> > have one less spice_return_if_fail() to come back to and change?
> 
> In the logging thread (actually the two thread) many people (like djasha and 
> Francois) didn't agreed on using two API for logging for different reasons
> and I personally agree with them.

I believe
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/spice-devel/2015-November/024205.html
provides one possible solution to this concern.

Christophe

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Spice-devel mailing list
Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel

[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]     [Monitors]