Subject: Re: devprop bogosity
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Christos Zoulas <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 05/02/2006 20:25:06
In article <4457BAB7.email@example.com>,
Garrett D'Amore <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>I've noticed something that I consider to be poor form.
>The prop_get (and devprop_get()) routines return a size_t. This is an
>unsigned value. Unfortunately, the implementation code returns -1 to
>indicate error, such as no such property.
>This means that I can't just do
> if (devprop_get(&sc->sc_dev, "videomode", ...) > 0)
>to check for an existing and non-empty property. Instead, I have to do
>something like this:
> if (devprop_get() != (size_t)-1)
>I don't particularly like having to cast in order to test for error
>results, and the bug this led to (in my own code) demonstrates that this
>kind of API is error prone.
>I'd recommend changing the return type of prop_get (and devprop_get())
>to be ssize_t (a signed value).
>Any arguments with this? If not, then I'll just make the change.
Or have a:
#define NOPROP (size_t)-1