| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Zeugswetter Andreas DCP SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> |
| Cc: | "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Claudio Natoli" <claudio(dot)natoli(at)memetrics(dot)com>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Bad bug in fopen() wrapper code |
| Date: | 2006-10-03 13:59:03 |
| Message-ID: | 24827.1159883943@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
"Zeugswetter Andreas DCP SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> writes:
> "If successful, _setmode returns the previous translation mode. A return
> value of -1 indicates an error"
> So, shouldn't we be testing for -1 instead of < 0 ?
I think the usual convention is to test for < 0, unless there are other
negative return values that are legal. This is doubtless a silly
cycle-shaving habit (on nearly all machines, test against 0 is a bit
more compact than test against other constants), but it is a widespread
habit anyway, and if you sometimes do it one way and sometimes another
you just create a distraction for readers.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | mark | 2006-10-03 14:12:57 | Re: Faster StrNCpy |
| Previous Message | Benny Amorsen | 2006-10-03 13:21:12 | Re: Faster StrNCpy |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | mark | 2006-10-03 14:12:57 | Re: Faster StrNCpy |
| Previous Message | Benny Amorsen | 2006-10-03 13:21:12 | Re: Faster StrNCpy |