RE: [Avr-libc-corelib] Error handling

[Weddington, Eric]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: 
> address@hidden 
> [mailto:address@hidden
> gnu.org] On Behalf Of Ruud Vlaming
> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 4:52 PM
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: Re: [Avr-libc-corelib] Error handling
> 
> On Monday 21 September 2009 23:27, Jan Waclawek wrote:
> 
> Allthough i agree that mostly error codes are a waste (if 
> they do not provide specific information)
> i strongly oppose the use of a single error variable. This 
> makes concurrent use of the library
> virtually impossible. Lets make all code reentrant, or at 
> least up to the point where
> the hardware dictates otherwise.
> 
> But i think we don't have 'errors' in the classical way. An 
> 'error' is a situation that the called
> function cannot handle. But i would say, that should not 
> happen, or at least, since our
> state space of the functions is usually very small, the 
> 'error' should be a natural part 
> of the returned information, thus, no generic error handling. 

Well said. I agree with you on all your points.

I won't rule out having a generic error variable, but I think it depends on the 
requirements of the implementation. It is certainly easier to implement without 
a generic error variable, if it can be done.