06.08.2014 11:48, Alex Peshkoff wrote: > I want to have warnings in IStatus separate from errors (keeping them in > same status vector IMO artifact of isc api). I think that after it this > is not big problem. Am I missing something obvious?
Yes. If not in the status, where should warnings be? And how an application can find out their existence? (Let alone doubtful meaning of warnings for most apps.) >> - Who is going to initialize status vectors? > This is not directly related here, but it seems possible to reset errors > in IStatus right after copying them to StatusException but before > throwing it. But still remains a problem - who will remove warnings from > IStatus? IMHO, IStatus should be created clean and then never reset till the death. Errors should be appended to the end. In this case it will be possible to report primary source of the error and following snowball on cleanup at the same time. > Currently we have a lot of void functions, but certainly they can be > made to return boolean, therefore avoiding a need in a check if non-zero > is returned (non-zero can be also valid pointer to interface, number of > bytes read from blob, etc.). I.e. if we may tune API to make error > possible only in case of false/zero/NULL returned, we may in many cases > avid a need in checking IStatus explicitly. May be you at last give up and accept COM with returning of HSTATUS? Doomed Delphi users could directly use "safecall" and interface definitions then. -- WBR, SD. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Infragistics Professional Build stunning WinForms apps today! Reboot your WinForms applications with our WinForms controls. Build a bridge from your legacy apps to the future. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=153845071&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
