[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [DotGNU]Errno Weirdness & Need a `HAVE_RENAME'
From: |
Gopal V |
Subject: |
Re: [DotGNU]Errno Weirdness & Need a `HAVE_RENAME' |
Date: |
Wed, 18 Dec 2002 09:09:28 +0530 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.2.5i |
If memory serves me right, Aditya P. Bansod wrote:
> I figured that was the case, but I put it in support instead. If it belongs
> in engine then the patch that I submitted will need to be changed.
No need to do that ... the engine & support code for a functions should be
in the same thread (IIRC), so resetting it in either of them is the same ..
Or to be more precise , we may come upon a platform which does not use the
variable "errno" ... then we may have to move the errno code in lib_*.c
into support/ anyway :-)
> On that same vien, what is the rule of thumb on where to split the code
> between engine and support?
No #ifdef HAVE_* in the internal call code ... which is sort of the rule
of thumb as far as I can see ...
I know I've made some mistakes with the DNS classes in lib_socket ...
@see{struct hostent} ... But well, haven't got around to fixing that
standard violation yet ... real bugs come first :-)
But having said that, I'm taking care not to introduce any such violations
in the future ...
Gopal
--
The difference between insanity and genius is measured by success