chinmoyr added inline comments. INLINE COMMENTS
> dfaure wrote in filehelper.cpp:46 > Well, this proves exactly my earlier point: we should only test errno *when* > a libc function fails. > > If this code is still checking errno after success somewhere, then *that* it > what should be fixed. And once it's fixed, there's no need to reset errno > here. > > (BTW strerror(11) is EAGAIN, "Resource temporarily unavailable", rather > frequent for non-blocking sockets, which is probably what triggered the slave > to wake up in the first place.) > > So, where is this code checking for errno even after success? In the caller > of this method? It's hard to review all these separate review requests > because I never have a global overview or the ability to search across the > whole codebase -- but at the same time, everything in a single merge request > would kill this slow webbrowser... [QtWebEngine compiled in debug mode] :-) Actually action OPEN and OPENDIR were relying on this errno assignment (in the previous revision). I forgot that in this revision both of them return on success. I have now removed that statement. Sorry for the trouble. REVISION DETAIL https://phabricator.kde.org/D6197 To: chinmoyr, elvisangelaccio, #frameworks, dfaure
