# grep -r 'MOZ_ASSERT("' . ./toolkit/components/places/History.cpp: MOZ_ASSERT("Do not call me!"); ./toolkit/components/places/Database.cpp: MOZ_ASSERT("Trying to set an unknown journal mode."); ./toolkit/components/places/nsAnnotationService.cpp: MOZ_ASSERT("Unsupported annotation type");

Comment on attachment 710452 [details] [diff] [review] patch v1.0 >Bug 838349 - Fix bogus use of assertions in Places [...] >- MOZ_NOT_REACHED("Fetching favicon information failed unexpectedly."); >+ MOZ_ASSERT(false, "Fetching favicon information failed unexpectedly."); Was this change accidental? The MOZ_NOT_REACHED usage looks correct to me there.

(in fact, perhaps of the other fixed chunks would be better as MOZ_NOT_REACHED("")...? Or is MOZ_ASSERT(false,"") better than NOT_REACHED for some reason?)

MOZ_NOT_REACHED is different from NS_NOTREACHED, in the fact it tells the compiler to optimize that code path to be not reachable. My original intent there was just to put a NS_NOTREACHED but I was confused by the naming... MOZ_ASSERT is better too.

see bug 820686

I see -- thanks!