From owner-p4-projects@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Mar 10 09:00:46 2004
Return-Path: <owner-p4-projects@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: p4-projects@freebsd.org
Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 32767)
	id 6B30116A4CE; Wed, 10 Mar 2004 09:00:46 -0800 (PST)
Delivered-To: perforce@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11B8216A511
	for <perforce@freebsd.org>; Wed, 10 Mar 2004 09:00:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC1A643D2D
	for <perforce@freebsd.org>; Wed, 10 Mar 2004 09:00:44 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by critter.freebsd.dk (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i2AH0h3Z043077;
	Wed, 10 Mar 2004 18:00:44 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
To: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net>
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 10 Mar 2004 08:15:37 PST."
             <20040310161537.GA36028@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> 
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 18:00:43 +0100
Message-ID: <43076.1078938043@critter.freebsd.dk>
cc: Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 48556 for review 
X-BeenThere: p4-projects@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: p4 projects tree changes <p4-projects.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/p4-projects>,
	<mailto:p4-projects-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/p4-projects>
List-Post: <mailto:p4-projects@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:p4-projects-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/p4-projects>,
	<mailto:p4-projects-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 17:00:47 -0000

In message <20040310161537.GA36028@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net>, Marcel Moolenaar writ
es:
>On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 09:17:22AM +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>> In message <200403100801.i2A810eC071863@repoman.freebsd.org>, Marcel Moolenaar 
>> >	Note that most #ifdef DDB instances have to be replaced
>> >	with #ifdef DEBUG, because DDB is specific to a single
>> >	back-end, not to having debugging support in general. A
>> >	new option, GDB, has been added to add support for gdb.
>> >	This has to be worked-out still.
>> 
>> #ifdef DEBUG is a singulary bad choice since much code have private
>> use of that macro.
>
>The point of using a define is to be able to get rid of the debugger
>calls in production systems. It doesn't matter if DEBUG has private
>meaning as long as it relates to having debugging code. Other than
>that, anything else is fine too, as long as it's not DDB.

Well, having an option people cannot enable without crippling a lot
of other code is no good either.  I'll really suggest you use
#ifdef KDB or something more specific than DEBUG.


-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.