Hello
Yes, I do know that ASSERT(FALSE) only occur in debug mode. However, I think this change
is safe. Many of the KEBUGCHECK(0) usages are for unimplemented or very rare cases which
shouldn't be hit, and the largest use of KEBUGCHECK(0) was in Mm (and the worst that
could happen there is that ros survives a little longer).
Anyway, I will look into re-adding KeBugCheck with proper bugcodes where appropriate.
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 20:15:38 +0200
From: hpoussin(a)reactos.org
To: ros-dev(a)reactos.org
Subject: Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [sginsberg] 35600: - Remove KEBUGCHECK and
KEBUGCHECKEX macros - Replace "KeBugCheck(0)" by ASSERT(FALSE) - Replace
deprecated "CPRINT" by DRINT1
sginsberg(a)svn.reactos.org a écrit :
Author: sginsberg
Date: Sun Aug 24 10:48:05 2008
New Revision: 35600
URL:
http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=35600&view=rev
Log:
- Remove KEBUGCHECK and KEBUGCHECKEX macros
- Replace "KeBugCheck(0)" by ASSERT(FALSE)
- Replace deprecated "CPRINT" by DRINT1
You probably understand that KEBUGCHECK(0) is *NOT* the same as
ASSERT(FALSE)
ASSERT(FALSE) is valid only in debug mode, and lets the code continue in
release mode.
KEBUGCHECK stops the execution also in release mode.
For example, in ntoskrnl/dbgk/dbgkobj.c, code now continues even if
DbgkpQueueMessage failed. Are you sure it is safe to continue in that case?
(same question applies for other locations)
Hervé
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
_________________________________________________________________
Discover the new Windows Vista
http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&form=Q…