Re: printf %s with NULL pointer (was Re: BUG #17098: Assert failed on composing an error message when adding a type to an extension being dropped)

Em ter., 13 de jul. de 2021 às 15:26, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> escreveu:

> Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > Em ter., 13 de jul. de 2021 às 11:29, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
> escreveu:
> >> I think you're missing my main point, which is that it seems certain
> that
> >> there are corner cases that do this *now*. I'm proposing that we
> redefine
> >> this as not being a crash case, full stop.
>
> > I agree with Laurenz Albe, that on Debug builds, *printf with NULL, must
> > crash.
>
> Did you see my followup?

I am trying.

> The vast majority of live systems do not do
> that, so we are accomplishing nothing of value by insisting it's a
> crash-worthy bug.
>
I agreed.

> I flat out don't agree that "crash on debug builds but it's okay on
> production" is a useful way to define this. I spend way too much
> time already on bug reports that only manifest with asserts enabled.
>
I understand.
Bug reports will decrease, because of that, people will lose interest and
motivation to report,
because (null), it doesn't seem like a serious error and my server didn't
crash.

It's a tricky tradeoff.

regards,
Ranier Vilela