On 9/26/07, Greg Hudson <ghudson@mit.edu> wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-09-24 at 13:24 +0100, Malcolm Rowe wrote:
> > Sure, though I had got the impression that the current guidance was to
> > avoid APR_SUCCESS completely because it was deprecated or similar.
> > However, I can't find any reference to that, so I've probably
> > mis-remembered.
>
> You may be thinking of the APR_IS_SUCCESS macro?
>
> (I have no idea why apr would like to regain the freedom to redefine
> APR_SUCCESS. That's an odd choice. But "status == APR_SUCCESS" is
> clearer than "!status" so there's some value there.)
APR explicitly does NOT want the freedom to redefine APR_SUCCESS, it's
defined as zero for a reason, and will stay that way. !status (or
!error if you pick your variable name for readability) is perfectly
valid when testing APR errors.
-garrett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Sep 27 18:29:25 2007