Sam Steingold <s...@gnu.org> writes: > Ben Pfaff wrote: >> Bruno Haible <br...@clisp.org> writes: >> >>> What do the others think? Should we possibly extend stdlib.in.h so that >>> abort() becomes a macro that produces a detailed error message, similar to >>> what assert() does? >> >> Just changing abort() to assert(0) would improve the diagnostics >> significantly. > > Sounds good. > Actually, > > assert(foo()) > > instead of > > if (!foo()) assert(0) > > wil probably produce an even better error message.
Unless you build with NDEBUG, in which case the entire assert(foo()) is a no-op... /Simon
