Re: RFC: error codes on exit
No, please use the standardized numbers when they apply.
On May 22, 2021 2:22:42 PM PDT, Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote:
Show 30 quoted lines
>Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> writes:
>>
>> > On 5/21/21 9:53 AM, Alex Henrie wrote:
>> >> On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 6:40 PM Felipe Contreras
>> >> <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> It's good to not include many initial codes, but I would start
>with at
>> >>> least three:
>> >>>
>> >>> OK = 0,
>> >>> UNKNOWN = 1,
>> >>> NORMAL = 2,
>> >> If you go that route, could you please pick a word other than
>> >> "normal"
>> >> to describe errors that are not entirely unexpected? I'm worried
>that
>> >> someone will see "normal" and use it instead of "OK" to indicate
>> >> success.
>> >>
>> >
>> > <sysexits.h>
>>
>> Is the value assignment standardized across systems?
>
>I think his intention was to suggest to use that list as inspiration...
>As in have USAGE, NOINPUT, UNAVAILABE, etc.
>
>I would prefer to start with something easy... UNKNOWN = 1, USUAL = 2.
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.