Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks, the updated code looks right and I'm OK with it as is. But I wonder if it wouldn't be better to instead remove the ASSERT and update the error message to log the
di->err
. This way it's still useful even in non-debug builds.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I prefer the ASSERT since it informs the reader that any other value here would be a programming error, not a conceivable run-time error. The value of
di->zerr
will only ever be EPIPE in this context, and the assertion serves to document that fact. The purpose of this special case is to give a more relevant internal error message in the context ofdiffer()
. Any other possible non-zero value ofdi->zerr
should result inerr
being set as well, and is therefore covered by the precedingif (err) return -1;
.