RE: Detecting unhandled errors

> From: Philip Martin [mailto:philip@codematters.co.uk]
> Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 5:44 PM

> "C. Michael Pilato" <cmpilato@collab.net> writes:
>
> > "Sander Striker" <striker@apache.org> writes:
> >
> >> Ah, right!
> >>
> >> So, would this do the trick? Is this desired, or should the caller clear
> >> the error itself?
> >
> > Feels (to me) more correct for the consumers to explicitly clear the
> > errors they are finished with.
>
> Not sure which is correct, after all the function does have "handle"
> in it's name.

I agree.

> I think I have identified all the fs-test error leaks, they are all in
> fs-test.c itself.

Great, thx.

> One thing I noticed is that when an program creates
> and clears lots of errors it can be very hard to determine which error
> got missed. I am using a local patch to register the error itself as
> the cleanup data pointer. What do you think?

All goodness, +1.

Sander

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Oct 13 18:47:17 2003