Patchset to make __func__ more visible

Andrew Bartlett abartlet at
Mon Nov 4 02:23:05 MST 2013

On Mon, 2013-11-04 at 09:47 +0100, Volker Lendecke wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 09:13:59PM +1300, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-11-01 at 13:11 +0100, Volker Lendecke wrote:
> > > Hi!
> > > 
> > > Attached find 2 patches that fix faulty DEBUG statements in
> > > one case by using __func__. I would like to see more use of
> > > this throughout our code, so I added another patch putting a
> > > hint into README.Coding.
> > 
> > I thought we were going to just fix the debug macro?  Last I remember
> > Jeremy had a patch, which mysteriously failed autobuild in some way. 
> Ok. The fix would be to just remove all the function names
> in DEBUG statements, right? Or do you want me to just fix it
> and hard-code the now correct name again?

First, I do totally agree that incorrect function names in debug
statements are worse than useless, they are misleading and deceptive,
and we should fix them. 

The plan was, as I recall it:
 - sort out DEBUG() to just do the right thing.  I think what we agreed
was that was to always print the header, even in 'foreground' mode.  
 - stop typing in the function name into new code
 - clean up old code.

If for some reason we just can't get the first part of that plan to
work, then using __func__ is quite a reasonable fallback, but it's
probably best to use string pasting rather than %s eg: __func__ ": foo"

Thanks for bringing this back up again.  We really do need to fix it
properly, once and for all. 

Andrew Bartlett

Andrew Bartlett                      
Authentication Developer, Samba Team 

More information about the samba-technical mailing list