apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@apache.org>
Subject Re: apr_ipsubnet_test
Date Sun, 13 Oct 2002 23:57:33 GMT
At 06:39 PM 10/13/2002, rbb@apache.org wrote:
>On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, Aaron Bannert wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 11:53:27AM -0400, Ryan Bloom wrote:
>> > > Is there a more APR-ish way to describe returning "true" or "false"
>> > > than
>> > 
>> > As with all other APR functions.  APR_SUCCESS indicates "true", Some other
>> > APR_STATUS code indicates false.
>> No it doesn't. True and false can be orthogonal to success/failure.
>> How does one express a successfully false condition?
>that is why it is apr_status_t, not apr_error_t.  There are specifically a
>set of status codes that do not indicate errors, only status
>conditions.  That series of values starts with APR_OS_START_STATUS, and
>examples of them are APR_INCHILD, APR_INPARENT, APR_DETACH.  They are
>commonly identified by the fact that they aren't APR_E*, rather they are
>just APR_*.

Shouldn't these consistently return true for APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS()?
Seems like a good argument for retaining that macro we debated before.

View raw message