== Quote from Dmitry Olshansky ([email protected])'s article > On 31.07.2010 23:44, Pluto wrote: > > This part has always bothered me. Could somebody please explain to me the > > rationale behind limiting functions to one usable error code? > > > > if(function()) > > ~~ > > > Inherently if is for testing _condition_ which is true/false. Going > futher you'd just reinvent switch statement. > which if perfectly OK for it, here it goes: > switch(function()){ > case ERR_CODE1: > // --- > break; > case ERR_CODE2: > // --- > break; > // --- > default: > // --- > break; > }
But these aren't compatible for the same function. Defining false as <1 would fix this. > Honestly, I'd suggest using exceptions instead of error codes. > Usage of error codes scales poorly and itself is very error-prone, also > killing the return value of functions just for error code leads to very > awkward design. I was asking purely out of design interest. ~~ :Pluto
