Am 01.06.2012 13:18, schrieb Markus Armbruster:
Andreas Färber<address@hidden> writes:
Am 31.05.2012 13:17, schrieb Igor Mammedov:
On 05/31/2012 12:16 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 31/05/2012 10:30, Markus Armbruster ha scritto:
Makes much sense, but maybe it should be done in OBJECT() cast? Assert
when we do OBJECT(NULL).
In my opinion, OBJECT(p) where p is a null pointer is perfectly valid
and should yield a null pointer.
Perhaps object_dynamic_cast and object_dynamic_cast_assert should do the
same?
or better object_dynamic_cast should return NULL if obj is NULL,
after all it's expected that it may return NULL
That's what I was suggesting: I think that we should define "NULL is not
of type TYPE_FOO" and thus have the ..._is_... functions return false,
and have the ..._cast_assert assert.
Is it?
See http://www.mail-archive.com/address@hidden/msg113922.html
Igor: object_dynamic_cast should return NULL if obj is NULL,
You: have the ..._cast_assert assert [on null argument, I presume]
Doesn't sound like the same suggestion to me :)
I'll let you to your opinion. :) However, my opinion is that
object_dynamic_cast_assert() should assert (its name should be program),
not segfault, and that
object_dynamic_cast()/object_is_type()/type_is_ancestor() should not
assert but return false / NULL. So as to the effects and usability that
pretty much aligns with Igor M., no?