From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 18:35:24 GMT
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 03/18] usage: implement error_errno() the same way as die_errno()
Message-ID: <7v8w0gq6fn.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <20101125212050.5188.56613.chriscool@tuxfamily.org>

Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org> writes:

> die_errno() is very useful, but sometimes we don't want to
> die after printing an error message and the error message
> from errno. So let's implement error_errno() that does the
> same thing as die_errno() except that it calls
> error_routine() instead of die_routine().

If this were "error_errno() is to error() as die_errno() is to die(); iow,
error_errno() does the same thing as error() but in addition shows the
errno information", it might be a good thing, but the above makes it sound
like you did something different.