Re: [PATCH 1/6] fix ambiguous errno treating after mktime()

To: David Holland <dholland-tech%netbsd.org@localhost>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] fix ambiguous errno treating after mktime()
From: Robert Elz <kre%munnari.OZ.AU@localhost>
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2008 09:46:26 +0700

    Date:        Sun, 31 Aug 2008 18:34:01 +0000
    From:        David Holland <dholland-tech%netbsd.org@localhost>
    Message-ID:  <20080831183401.GA5824%netbsd.org@localhost>

  | Right, but, as previously noted, it is desirable for functions that
  | are cognizant of errno to leave errno unchanged if they have not
  | failed, regardless of what the formal definition says.

Why?   What conceivable benefit does that bring anyone?

kre

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH 1/6] fix ambiguous errno treating after mktime()
  - From: Robert Elz
- Re: [PATCH 1/6] fix ambiguous errno treating after mktime()
  - From: David Holland

References:
- Re: [PATCH 1/6] fix ambiguous errno treating after mktime()
  - From: David Holland
- Re: [PATCH 1/6] fix ambiguous errno treating after mktime()
  - From: Roland Dowdeswell
- Re: [PATCH 1/6] fix ambiguous errno treating after mktime()
  - From: Robert Elz

Prev by Date: Re: RFC - add snscanf(3) to stdio
Next by Date: Re: RFC - add snscanf(3) to stdio
Previous by Thread: Re: [PATCH 1/6] fix ambiguous errno treating after mktime()
Next by Thread: Re: [PATCH 1/6] fix ambiguous errno treating after mktime()
Indexes:

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index