This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sourceware.cygnus.com mailing list for the glibc project.
Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
On Sat, Jul 10, H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 16:28:52 -0700 (PDT) > > From: hjl@varesearch.com (H.J. Lu) > > > > Since we changed the return value of getxxx_r, I added a new version > > for each function and kept the old one. > > > > I think you should also set errno since the new functions do not > > necessarily do this. The whole point of having getXXbyYY_r returning > > the error value is avoiding the use of thread-specific data. > > > > I don't know what you mean. The new functions return "errno" in case > of errors. Why do you want to set "errno" with "errno"? The old functions sets errno and returns -1. But POSIX only says, that the functions should return the errno value, and not setting errno. So if the next functions or a later version will only return the errno value, and doesn't set errno, your "old" functions will not longer work. Thorsten -- Thorsten Kukuk http://www.suse.de/~kukuk/ kukuk@suse.de SuSE GmbH Deutschherrenstr. 15-19 90429 Nuernberg Linux is like a Vorlon. It is incredibly powerful, gives terse, cryptic answers and has a lot of things going on in the background.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |