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.
