From: Jeff King Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 16:05:24 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] doc: document error handling functions and conventions (Re: [PATCH 03/14] copy_fd: pass error message back through a strbuf) Message-ID: <20150217160524.GA11186@peff.net> In-Reply-To: On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 08:03:00AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Whether or not we decide on a different error-handling convention in the > > future, it is a fact of life that a good bit of code already uses the > > "strbuf" convention documented by Jonathan's patch. So I think it is OK > > to merge it as is. If we change the preferred convention in the future, > > one part of the change will be to update this file. > > I wasn't sure about "a good bit of code already", but that settles > it. Let's take it as-is and see how the code evolves. I'm not convinced myself after a quick grep. But it's certainly non-zero, and I think I would rather have the technique documented than not, so I withdraw my earlier complaints. -Peff