Re: let g_warn_if_fail replace g_assert

["Brian J. Tarricone" <bjt23 cornell edu>]

Marco Barisione wrote:
> Il giorno mer, 17/10/2007 alle 11.56 +0200, Tim Janik ha scritto:
> > - add g_warn_if_fail (condition); which produces a critical
> >    warning about failing assertions but contrary to g_assert
> >    returns.
>
> If it's called g_warn_if_fail() I would expect a g_warning() not a
> g_critical().

Agreed -- and of course g_return_if_fail() does a g_warning(), so doing 
a g_warning() on g_warn_if_fail() is kinda redundant.  How about 
g_critical_if_fail()?

It's a shame tho that we can't encode the "it returns if it fails" 
behavior in the name as well -- g_return_if_fail() is very clear what it 
does (IMO, the fact that it also does a g_warning() is a 
debugging-related bonus, not its primary purpose).  g_critical_if_fail() 
sorta sounds like all it does is do a g_critical() if the condition 
fails, and then continues on from that point.  I suppose 
g_critical_return_if_fail() is a bit verbose (esp. when you consider 
g_critical_return_val_if_fail() is even longer).  But I guess good API 
docs will suffice ^_^.

	-brian