freetds AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: FreeTDS Development Group
List archive
- From: "James K. Lowden" <jklowden AT freetds.org>
- To: FreeTDS Development Group <freetds AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [freetds] Return error proposal
- Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2008 11:01:55 -0500
Frediano Ziglio wrote:
> I personally never liked things
> like errno and returning a true/false for errors. Why not using a bit
> to distinguish error from success??
Hi Freddy,
Plauger comments on this in his book on the standard C library. He says
error processing is hard and that errno, while it looks messy, has
survived despite many suggested (even obvious) alternatives because it
works.
> For instance >= 0 for success and
> < 0 for error.
It requires bit-twiddling to get at the real error.
> But now even
> tds_connect_and_login return the error. Personally also I don't like
> an oserr in TDSSOCKET, errno usually don't have problems with thread
> on multi-threaded safe environment (that is major ones) but this errno
> have threads problems.
I'm unconvinced. The db-lib error handler passes oserr. Surely we can
copy a value to a tread-safe location for later inspection. You can't
pass an "errno is valid" flag because subsequent libc calls change errno.
Happy to discuss. :-)
Regards,
--jkl
-
[freetds] Return error proposal,
Frediano Ziglio, 12/17/2008
- Re: [freetds] Return error proposal, James K. Lowden, 12/17/2008
-
Re: [freetds] Return error proposal,
James K. Lowden, 12/17/2008
- Re: [freetds] Return error proposal, Frediano Ziglio, 12/17/2008
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.