Policy on tolerance of invalid parameters: programming error or API guarantee? about sdl HOT 2 OPEN

For comparison, https://docs.gtk.org/glib/warnings.html and https://docs.gtk.org/glib/error-reporting.html have more on GLib's approach to error handling, distinguishing checks for programming errors ("some code is wrong and needs fixing") from the error indicator for runtime errors (GError is the equivalent of SDL_SetError() and related APIs).

from sdl.

The intention is for SDL to never crash with invalid parameters (unless passed garbage pointers that aren't possible to validate). There are a number of places even internal to SDL where we rely on this behavior, so I wouldn't want a blanket "crash on invalid parameters" setting, but rather the application is responsible for checking return values where it makes sense.

A mode where the validation is stripped out is interesting, but out of scope for SDL3 release unless someone else wants to come along and contribute it. I suspect it would explode spectacularly in most SDL usage.

from sdl.