2011/11/2 Steven Bosscher <stevenb....@gmail.com>: > On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:17 PM, Janus Weil <ja...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: >> What the patch does is to change the return value from >> 'gfc_try' (SUCCESS/FAILURE) to 'match' >> (MATCH_YES/MATCH_NO/MATCH_ERROR). Of course we're not really >> 'matching' anything here, but the yes/no/error range of values is >> exactly what we need in this case, so I think (ab-)using the 'match' >> enum makes sense. > > I don't like that at all. Sooner or later that's going to confuse > someone.
I found the current way even more confusing and thought this might be better. > There has to be a better solution... ... like what? Introducing a new enum just for this one case? Probably not. Anyway, we can also just leave it like it is. It was just a small thing that I stumbled across. Cheers, Janus
