Anyone has any further comment on this?
On Sep 13, 2013 10:47 PM, "Jason Ekstrand" wrote:
> I think this is probably pretty good. most of those just look like the
> programmer being lazy and not remembering wl_log exists. We may want to
> keep it as printf in the cases where it immediately aborts
I think this is probably pretty good. most of those just look like the
programmer being lazy and not remembering wl_log exists. We may want to
keep it as printf in the cases where it immediately aborts or calls
assert(0). That way it guarantees a message gets printed in the case where
it causes the
use wl_log instead of printf and fprintf in core library
---
I'm pretty sure these printf usages should be avoided since libraries should
not print to stdout. But I'm not sure if there is any reason for favoring a
fprintf to stderr over wl_log. Please enlighten me if there is any.
src/connection.
