On Fr, 2014-06-13 at 09:47 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 13/06/2014 09:15, Markus Armbruster ha scritto: > > I'm afraid this is not an improvement. > > > > Your patch makes the code ignore fclose() failure silently. This is a > > common mistake. fclose() failure after write can mean data loss, and > > the user certainly needs to know about that. > > If you want that, the best solution is to first fflush() and then > fclose().
Agree. If you really care you'll go flush/sync before close, so you still have a valid file handle when you see the failure. Question is do we really need that here? This isn't your virtual disk, it's just a few audio samples which might get lost ... cheers, Gerd
