Tyler Dauwalder <tyler@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I am not sure if B_NOT_IMPLEMENTED is a good error message, as it > > would > > only be useful for beta APIs > Well, I'm not really expecting it to be returned very often in > production > code, but in the course of development, it's oftentimes been useful > to flag > that all or part of a function is unimplemented, and having a "return > B_NOT_IMPLEMENTED;" is a nice and obvious, plus syntactically and > semantically correct way of doing that. It's a kind of deficiency that shouldn't be honored with its own error code IMO :) I'd like a UNIMPLEMENTED() macro (as Marco did in the Media Kit) and returning something along the lines of B_ERROR better, but OTOH an error code more shouldn't hurt as well. > > - maybe EOPNOTSUPP or ENOTSUP is a better > > one in this case. > I would tend to shy away from using Posix errors. We do have > B_UNSUPPORTED, > but it doesn't really fit the situation either. Well, right; I think we should have a B_ error code for every POSIX error code (we need). Bye, Axel.