From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add comments about why errno is set to zero. |
Date: | 2005-12-01 21:00:15 |
Message-ID: | 200512012100.jB1L0FS26208@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> momjian(at)postgresql(dot)org (Bruce Momjian) writes:
> > Log Message:
> > -----------
> > Add comments about why errno is set to zero.
>
> These comments seem a bit wrongheaded, since "checking
> LONG_MIN/LONG_MAX" is exactly not what we could do to detect an overflow
> error.
Yea, I noticed the 0 was listed as another value that needs to be
checked. Should I just change them all to:
errno = 0; /* avoid checking result for failure */
or should I add a macro to c.h as:
/* Sometimes we need to clear errno so we can check errno
* without having to check for a failure value from the function
* call.
*/
#define CLEAR_ERRNO \\
do { \
errno = 0; \\
while (0);
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-12-01 21:06:20 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add comments about why errno is set to zero. |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-12-01 20:53:34 | Re: pgsql: Add comments about why errno is set to zero. |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-12-01 21:01:34 | Re: generalizing the planner knobs |
Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2005-12-01 20:54:42 | Re: generalizing the planner knobs |