From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 18:48:40 GMT
Subject: Re: Git compile warnings (under mac/clang)
Message-ID: <xmqqmw59qqnr.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <20150123183737.GA32191@peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> But of all the options outlined, I think I'd much rather just see an
> assert() for something that should never happen, rather than mixing it
> into the logic.

Surely.

> In that vein, one thing that puzzles me is that the current code looks
> like:
>
>   if (options->msg_severity && msg_id >= 0 && msg_id < FSCK_MSG_MAX)
> 	  severity = options->msg_severity[msg_id];
>   else {
> 	  severity = msg_id_info[msg_id].severity;
> 	  ...
>   }
>
> So if the severity override list given by "options" exists, _and_ if we
> are in the enum range, then we use that. Otherwise, we dereference the
> global list. But wouldn't an out-of-range condition have the exact same
> problem dereferencing that global list?
>
> IOW, should this really be:
>
>   if (msg_id < 0 || msg_id >= FSCK_MSG_MAX)
> 	die("BUG: broken enum");
>
>   if (options->msg_severity)
> 	severity = options->msg_severity[msg_id];
>   else
> 	severity = msg_id_info[msg_id].severity;
>
> ? And then you can spell that first part as assert(), which I suspect
> (but did not test) may shut up clang's warnings.

Sounds like a sensible fix to me.