On 25 April 2014 11:44, Markus Armbruster arm...@redhat.com wrote:
Using error_is_set(ERRP) to find out whether a function failed is
either wrong, fragile, or unnecessarily opaque. It's wrong when ERRP
may be null, because errors go undetected when it is. It's fragile
when proving ERRP
Using error_is_set(ERRP) to find out whether a function failed is
either wrong, fragile, or unnecessarily opaque. It's wrong when ERRP
may be null, because errors go undetected when it is. It's fragile
when proving ERRP non-null involves a non-local argument. Else, it's
unnecessarily opaque
Am 25.04.2014 12:44, schrieb Markus Armbruster:
Using error_is_set(ERRP) to find out whether a function failed is
either wrong, fragile, or unnecessarily opaque. It's wrong when ERRP
may be null, because errors go undetected when it is. It's fragile
when proving ERRP non-null involves a
On 25 April 2014 12:25, Andreas Färber afaer...@suse.de wrote:
I do wonder, and maybe Peter can comment as native speaker, whether it
should be uses (plural) or usage in both subjects?
In this subject I would consider all of use, uses and
usage as acceptable variations.
thanks
-- PMM
Andreas Färber afaer...@suse.de writes:
Am 25.04.2014 12:44, schrieb Markus Armbruster:
Using error_is_set(ERRP) to find out whether a function failed is
either wrong, fragile, or unnecessarily opaque. It's wrong when ERRP
may be null, because errors go undetected when it is. It's fragile
Am 25.04.2014 14:55, schrieb Markus Armbruster:
Andreas Färber afaer...@suse.de writes:
Am 25.04.2014 12:44, schrieb Markus Armbruster:
Using error_is_set(ERRP) to find out whether a function failed is
either wrong, fragile, or unnecessarily opaque. It's wrong when ERRP
may be null, because
Andreas Färber afaer...@suse.de writes:
Am 25.04.2014 14:55, schrieb Markus Armbruster:
Andreas Färber afaer...@suse.de writes:
Am 25.04.2014 12:44, schrieb Markus Armbruster:
Using error_is_set(ERRP) to find out whether a function failed is
either wrong, fragile, or unnecessarily opaque.