Re: [PATCH 15/67] convert trivial sprintf / strcpy calls to xsnprintf
From: Stefan Beller <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 23:06:34
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Jeff King [off-list ref] wrote:
That misses the "assert" behavior of xsnprintf.
When I saw the first patches of this series, I like them.
Some off topic thoughts:
Having an "assert" behavior is not a good user experience though
and should be fixed. To fix it we need stack traces. And the git
version. And telling the user to send it to the mailing list.
I wonder if we want to include a trace where possible (i.e.
when compiled with gcc or other precompiler conditions)
into these assertive behaviors.
I'd guess we have an assertive behavior if die("BUG:...") is called,
so maybe we can just check inside of die if we want to print
a stack trace additionally ?
In my dream world we would have a similar mechanism as in
the kernel, a "BUG:..." will be automatically sent to some
collection agency via UDP.