From owner-freebsd-current Fri May 21 1:35:27 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from herring.nlsystems.com (nlsys.demon.co.uk [158.152.125.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE6CE15959; Fri, 21 May 1999 01:35:23 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dfr@nlsystems.com) Received: from localhost (dfr@localhost) by herring.nlsystems.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA70961; Fri, 21 May 1999 09:35:02 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from dfr@nlsystems.com) Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 09:35:02 +0100 (BST) From: Doug Rabson To: Nick Hibma Cc: Nick Hibma , Peter Wemm , Doug Rabson , FreeBSD current Mailing list Subject: Re: priorities In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, 21 May 1999, Nick Hibma wrote: > > > #define PRIORITY_FAIL -1 > > > > > > It sounds like we can loads of haggling about the names there... The > > > last one is to take out the dependency on errno being greater than > > > zero. > > > > I would actually quite like to keep the possibility of returning an errno. > > It gives the possibility of returning an appropriate error if something > > strange happened (other than the hardware not being present). > > > How do you guarantuee that the errno is positive? Add an assert > somewhere, like checking whether ENXIO >= PRIORITY_FAIL? They just are positive and have always been positive :-) Changing that (making errnos negative) would break so much code I don't even want to think about it. -- Doug Rabson Mail: dfr@nlsystems.com Nonlinear Systems Ltd. Phone: +44 181 442 9037 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message