On Sat, May 03, 2014 at 12:36:49AM +0100, Emil Velikov wrote: > On 29/04/14 04:43, Chad Versace wrote: > > The function creates and returns two objects: a context and a config. > > The context is the function's return value, and the config is an out > > parameter. > > > > Functions with asymmetric returns, I find awkard. Fix the signature to > > return both objects as out parameters. > > > Hi Chad, > > Rather silly question (as I'm getting through the codebase). > > Wouldn't it be better if use return int over bool ? The function name does not > imply that a bool is returned, plus it gives us the flexibility of returning > appropriate (currently unneeded) errno.
In designing the Waffle's public API, I tried to follow the example of EGL, which returns either NULL or false on failure. This design then affected Waffle's internal APIs too. In retrospect, I think choosing to model Waffle's error reporting on EGL's model may have been a clumsy choice. If Waffle 2.0 ever happens, then that would be a good time to reconsider the approach. In general, returning int rather than bool does provide more flexibility for reporting status, but I chose to use bool in this patch to be consistent with the rest of Waffle. If waffle_try_create_context() returned an enum that indicated the cause of failure, then we could possibly eliminate the exit_on_fail parameter. I would welcome such a cleanup. I wish the public API, though, to remain consistent in how it reports error. Return NULL or false, then the user inspects the waffle_error_info if he wants more information, similar to eglGetError(). _______________________________________________ waffle mailing list waffle@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/waffle
