Hi Gert, > (Even though the design decision to call a library-specific error reporting > function "error_strerror()" is not something I find particularily well chosen... > what's wrong with "polar_strerror()"???)
Nothing is wrong with that. It's PolarSSL coding standard compliant (https://polarssl.org/kb/development/polarssl-coding-standards) The PolarSSL SSL library function naming standard is 'MODULE_FUNCTION_NAME'. That is the cause of the current naming convention. If this proves to be an issue with other implementation we will reconsider of course ;) Regards, Paul
