Ingo Weinhold wrote:
On 2008-05-21 at 01:05:51 [+0200], kaoutsis <kaoutsis@xxxxxx> wrote:Ingo Weinhold wrote:wrote: Anyway, it certainly doesn't harm to try, but I have little hope that this will have any effect. If the standard maintainers consider the request, they are in a dilemma. Undoing the Issue 6 error codes change means that all the applications that relied on it would become non-conforming.I agree. I had an idea how to tackle the problem, may be good, may be bad:The main problem is not binary compatibility. The problem is that the Be API requires that error codes be negative. E.g. create_sem() returns a non-negative value (the sem_id) when successful, a negative error code otherwise. A good deal of other functions/methods use the same strategy, and so does third party code. Making our error codes positive will break them all.Changing concerned API functions to return -1 and set errno would be an option, but that would be quite a bit of work and third party software would have to be changed as well. Personally I don't even find this option very appealing.
Also, i didn't find this idea very appealing and that was the 'easy part'; i forgot the 'hard part' :-), just for the record here it is: all the functions that returns semIds, areaIds etc, they would check for errors like this: area_id areaSpaceId; areaSpaceId = create_area("AreaSpace",... if (areaSpaceId < B_OK) { problems: a) In all similar current code places, the 0 should be replaced with B_OK b) There must be an assurance that the valid ids should not conflict with the error codes. So in the hypothetical new haiku API the error codes would be _positives_; and this change allows, in the same time, someone to compile the code with gcc2 and the error codes would be _negatives_ :-) good bye, Vasilis