On Mon, Jul 4, 2022 at 2:52 PM Hanna Reitz wrote:
> There are a couple of places where you decided to replace “*len”
> variables that used to store the return value by a plain “ret”. That
> seems good to me, given how these functions no longer return length
> values, but you haven’t done so consis
On 17.05.22 13:35, Alberto Faria wrote:
They currently return the value of their 'bytes' parameter on success.
Make them return 0 instead, for consistency with other I/O functions and
in preparation to implement them using generated_co_wrapper. This also
makes it clear that short reads/writes ar
On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 12:35:07PM +0100, Alberto Faria wrote:
> They currently return the value of their 'bytes' parameter on success.
>
> Make them return 0 instead, for consistency with other I/O functions and
> in preparation to implement them using generated_co_wrapper. This also
> makes it c
On Tue, 17 May 2022 12:35:07 +0100
Alberto Faria wrote:
> They currently return the value of their 'bytes' parameter on success.
>
> Make them return 0 instead, for consistency with other I/O functions and
> in preparation to implement them using generated_co_wrapper. This also
> makes it clear
They currently return the value of their 'bytes' parameter on success.
Make them return 0 instead, for consistency with other I/O functions and
in preparation to implement them using generated_co_wrapper. This also
makes it clear that short reads/writes are not possible.
Signed-off-by: Alberto Fa
