I just checked in a change to apr-util/xlate/xlate.c following Ulrich's recommend pattern of copy/test.
If any APR developer has strong feelings for the *other* way, then it's on your head to fix it. I see no point to continuing this conversation, and a lot of reason to simply have a frickin' fix in the code. Cheers, -g On Wed, Jul 17, 2002 at 05:09:55PM -0700, Greg Stein wrote: > 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/ > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
