On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 10:43:27AM -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
> Before 5c69cb60 this wouldn't matter, because ProcXIQueryPointer
> manually emitted its own error before (bogusly) returning Success to the
> main loop. Since these tests only look at the return value of the
> dispatch function we'd
On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 10:43:27 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
> Before 5c69cb60 this wouldn't matter, because ProcXIQueryPointer
> manually emitted its own error before (bogusly) returning Success to the
> main loop. Since these tests only look at the return value of the
> dispatch function we'd
On Wed, 2016-08-17 at 23:57 +0900, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On 17/08/16 11:43 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
> >
> > Before 5c69cb60 this wouldn't matter, because ProcXIQueryPointer
> > manually emitted its own error before (bogusly) returning Success to the
> > main loop. Since these tests only look at
On 17/08/16 11:43 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
> Before 5c69cb60 this wouldn't matter, because ProcXIQueryPointer
> manually emitted its own error before (bogusly) returning Success to the
> main loop. Since these tests only look at the return value of the
> dispatch function we'd think things
Before 5c69cb60 this wouldn't matter, because ProcXIQueryPointer
manually emitted its own error before (bogusly) returning Success to the
main loop. Since these tests only look at the return value of the
dispatch function we'd think things succeeded even when we'd generated
an error.
With that
