On Wed, Jul 17, 2002 at 05:39:52PM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote: > Ulrich Drepper wrote: > > On Wed, 2002-07-17 at 11:00, Sascha Schumann wrote: > > > int *func_call(); > > > #define errno *func_call() > > >=20 > > > I don't see the problem with "return errno;" though. > > > > The problem is not > > > > return errno; > > > > it is > > > > return errno ? errno : EINVAL; > > > > Are you suggesting something will change the value of 'errno' during > this code, such that the errno being tested isn't the value being > returned??
I don't think Ulrich is concerned with *correctness*. His comments are about resulting code size and performance. I think Ulrich hasn't been clear in that regard, but you (Jim) are also (seemingly) tending to be a bit obstinate in wanting to do it your way :-) Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
