"Oleg Strikov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> Previous behavior was working correctly. You have to handle >> >> errorcodes >> >> at some point and that means when error is handled it is zeroed (or >> >> GRUB_ERR_NONE). So code is in callee where that loop was. >> >> >I suggest that we never set grub_errno to 0 (except the initialization). >> >That would match the standard errno behavior: >> >> >http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/errno.html<http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/errno.html> > > But is it correct to check and handle errno in some `library` function (now > we do) ? I CAN, but i do not have to examine errno after each > non-error-free call; is it right?
This documentation about errno does NOT match grub_errno, please keep that in mind :-) You should *always* check for errors. *always* check if memory allocation succeeded, etc. If you write code that ignored errors, it is broken. A more explicit approach would be letting every function return grub_err_t. -- Marco _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
