Hey:
On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 5:33 AM, Michael Wallner <m...@php.net> wrote: > There's already ZEND_RESULT_CODE, or did I miss anything? yes, we were talking about use ZEND_RESULT_CODE as return type hinting for those functions use SUCCSS/FAILURE .. furthermore, maybe we could use it as all ZEND_API's return type hinting thanks > > On 25 Dec 2014 06:45, "Xinchen Hui" <larue...@php.net> wrote: >> >> Hey: >> >> On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 12:38 PM, Pierre Joye <pierre....@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Andrea Faulds <a...@ajf.me> wrote: >> >> >> >>> On 24 Dec 2014, at 23:53, Levi Morrison <le...@php.net> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 4:27 PM, Johannes Schlüter >> >>> <johan...@schlueters.de> wrote: >> >>>> On Wed, 2014-12-24 at 11:13 -0700, Levi Morrison wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>>> I'm asking for specific things. The reason is that some API's do a >> >>>>> non-zero error code; the fact that they are negative is a detail >> >>>>> that >> >>>>> we should not need to care about. >> >>>> >> >>>> My guess is that positive values more often might have a meaning ("5 >> >>>> items changed", "address 0x1234") whereas negative values less often >> >>>> have a meaning. Also passing -1 as parameter is more often invalid. >> >>>> Thus >> >>>> passing -1 is making debug output look more suspicious. >> >>>> >> >>>> (while there are cases where -1 is valid, see recent famous >> >>>> pid >> >>>> = fork(); /* ... */ kill(pid, SIGKILL); issue) >> >>> >> >>> I don't think this is the same use case as SUCCESS and FAILURE. Many >> >>> functions have an out parameter which is only valid when the returned >> >>> value is SUCCESS. This is not the same thing as an API which returns >> >>> an integer and just happen to embed error state in the negative range. >> >>> Notably, it doesn't make sense to do `strpos() == SUCCESS` to check >> >>> success; these are different cases. My question is specifically >> >>> directed at the ones that use SUCCESS and FAILURE: which ones require >> >>> FAILURE to be negative instead of the normal UNIX-ism of non-zero? >> >>> >> >>> For the record I am in favor of an enum such as `zend_status` or some >> >>> other name which indicates whether an operation succeeded or not for >> >>> the reasons already cited in this thread. I just don't see why FAILURE >> >>> needs to be negative and want to know why this is the case. >> >> >> >> Hi Levi, >> >> >> >> Again, I think the reason FAILURE is -1 is for consistency with other >> >> functions which use negative return values on error. Some functions return >> >> negative error codes, others just -1. Some functions return useful >> >> positive >> >> values, others just 0. But the idea is that all functions return a >> >> negative >> >> number on error, so you can use if (foo() < 0) to check for errors. That’s >> >> the point of making FAILURE be -1, AIUI. It makes it consistent with other >> >> things, like fork() or strpos(). >> > >> > doing if (foo() < 0 is exactly what should not be done, for any >> > function returning a status. Only FAILURE and SUCCESS should be used. >> > >> > Which value FAILURE and SUCCESS have is not really relevant here but >> > to actually be consistent. >> > >> > For example >> > >> > ZEND_API int zend_hash_del(HashTable *ht, zend_string *key) >> > >> > should actually be >> > >> > ZEND_API status zend_hash_del(HashTable *ht, zend_string *key) >> > >> > and its usage should be: >> > >> > if (zend_hash_del(ht, key) == FAILURE) { >> > ... >> > } >> > >> > Same for zend_parse_parameters and the likes. >> > >> > However functions like zval_update_class_constant >> > (http://lxr.php.net/xref/PHP_TRUNK/Zend/zend_API.c#1132 ) and all the >> > underlying functions, are confusing. Both the signature and the return >> > values should rely on FAILURE/SUCCESS. >> > >> > I think this is what Xinchen means too. Or at least this is what I >> > mean with unify the APIs. >> yes. and as a soft solution. >> >> we can change these functions which use success/failure return >> zend_status instead of int first. >> >> thanks >> >> > >> > Cheers, >> > -- >> > Pierre >> > >> > @pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org >> >> >> >> -- >> Xinchen Hui >> @Laruence >> http://www.laruence.com/ >> >> -- >> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List >> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php >> > -- Xinchen Hui @Laruence http://www.laruence.com/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php