Re: some error fixes in signify
On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 14:40, Marc Espie wrote: Revisiting the error messages: - pass the filenames to the low-level functions, so they can tell you what's going on. - FIX readall and writeall. The logic *is* wrong. Just because they return something != len, doesn't mean they return -1. hmm. the intention was to keep the code as small as possible. a detailed dissection of every error that will never happen runs somewhat contrary to that goal. it's not like the difference between a failed write and a short write is meaningful to the user. the important thing is that it not fail silently. if you need to know why it failed, ktrace it. :)
Re: some error fixes in signify
On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 10:36:53AM -0500, Ted Unangst wrote: On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 14:40, Marc Espie wrote: Revisiting the error messages: - pass the filenames to the low-level functions, so they can tell you what's going on. - FIX readall and writeall. The logic *is* wrong. Just because they return something != len, doesn't mean they return -1. hmm. the intention was to keep the code as small as possible. a detailed dissection of every error that will never happen runs somewhat contrary to that goal. it's not like the difference between a failed write and a short write is meaningful to the user. Oh come on, that's a bug, and really poor style. You're going to call err() when there's no meaningful value in errno ? That's really a bad example, if nothing else. There's a difference between small and obnoxiously wrong. Even if it's a wee bit larger, it doesn't make it less easy to read.
Re: some error fixes in signify
On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 16:55, Marc Espie wrote: Oh come on, that's a bug, and really poor style. You're going to call err() when there's no meaningful value in errno ? That's really a bad example, if nothing else. ok, sure, make it errx. but next somebody is going to want to rewrite it into a loop to handle nonblocking files, and then somebody adds a timeout, and then comes a fucking progress meter...
