Re: [PATCH/RFC] doc: document error handling functions and conventions (Re: [PATCH 03/14] copy_fd: pass error message back through a strbuf)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 08:03:00AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> > Whether or not we decide on a different error-handling convention in the
> > future, it is a fact of life that a good bit of code already uses the
> > "strbuf" convention documented by Jonathan's patch. So I think it is OK
> > to merge it as is. If we change the preferred convention in the future,
> > one part of the change will be to update this file.
> 
> I wasn't sure about "a good bit of code already", but that settles
> it.  Let's take it as-is and see how the code evolves.

I'm not convinced myself after a quick grep. But it's certainly
non-zero, and I think I would rather have the technique documented than
not, so I withdraw my earlier complaints.

-Peff
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]