Alexey Varlamov wrote:
2006/12/14, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Tim Ellison wrote:
> Gregory Shimansky wrote:
>> Tim Ellison wrote:
>>> Gregory Shimansky wrote:
>>>> Tim Ellison wrote:
>>>>> Maybe we do, i.e. where there is no value "-Dfoobar". So
perhaps we
>>>>> need to say that GetSystemProperty returns VMI_ERROR_NONE and
sets the
>>>>> the *valuePtr to NULL if there is no value; and returns a
>>>>> VMI_ERROR_NOT_FOUND if the property is undefined.
>>>> Now I am confused. What is the difference between a property
which has
>>>> no value and an undefined property?
>>> Sorry, I meant a property whose value is NULL. So the three cases
are:
>>>
>>> 1) key = "foo", value = "bar"
>>> 2) key = "foo", value = NULL
>>> 3) no key called "foo"
>>>
>>> If (2) is disallowed then we should document that in
SetSystemProperty().
>> I would prefer to have (2) to be illegal. Can we document this please?
>
> No objection here. So to attempt a new clarification ...
>
> GetSystemProperty will return VMI_ERROR_NONE and a string value for
> existing properties, or NULL value for a non-existent property.
>
> We then rename VMI_ERROR_NOT_FOUND to VMI_ERROR_ILLEGAL_ARG and
> SetSystemProperty will return VMI_ERROR_NONE for setting an existing
> property to a string value, or VMI_ILLEGAL_ARG if there is an
attempt to
> set the property value to NULL.
>
> How does that sound?
Why again do we want 2 to be illegal? (Sorry, was out of pocket for a
while there yesterday...)
This is aligned with the API specification for
j.l.System.[s|g]etProperty(), which explicitly disallowes NULLs for
both keys and values.
Why do I care about the Java API here?
geir
