Karl Fogel wrote:
Justin Erenkrantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Due to some recent confusion with SVN and APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS,
I'd like to consider removing this macro and just forcing
everyone to do either a non-zero check or checking against the
APR_SUCCESS value (which isn't strictly needed because APR_SUCCESS
will always be 0, but that's fine with me).
Thoughts? I know most of our code in APR and httpd-2.0 is
pretty good about not using APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS. -- justin
+1 if they always mean the same thing, but I'd like to first know the
answer to this question:
If APR_SUCCESS is absolutely and always defined to be zero, then why
does apr_errno.h define the APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS() macro like this
under WIN32
#define APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS(s) ((s) == APR_SUCCESS \
|| (s) == APR_OS_START_SYSERR + ERROR_SUCCESS)
and like this under OS2:
#define APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS(s) ((s) == APR_SUCCESS \
|| (s) == APR_OS_START_SYSERR + NO_ERROR)
That looks a bit more complex than just "== 0" to me... ?
ERROR_SUCCESS and NO_ERROR are always 0. If you look at the
APR_TO_OS_ERROR and APR_FROM_OS_ERROR marcos, you'll see that they
_always_ get mapped to/from APR_SUCCES.
So these extra checks are actually bogus, evil, and non-tax-deductible.
(And the APR_FROM/TO_OS_ERROR macros are wrong, too; they should read:
#define APR_FROM_OS_ERROR(e) ((e) == ERROR_SUCCESS ? APR_SUCCESS : (e) +
APR_OS_START_SYSERR)
#define APR_TO_OS_ERROR(e) ((e) == APR_SUCCESS ? ERROR_SUCCESS : (e) -
APR_OS_START_SYSERR)
)
--
Brane Äibej <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.xbc.nu/brane/
