On Feb 11, 2013, at 20:32, Pádraig Brady <p...@draigbrady.com> wrote:
> On 02/11/2013 08:47 PM, Assaf Gordon wrote: >> - if (errno != 0) >> + /* EINVAL can happen if 'base' is invalid (hardcoded as 10, so can't >> happen), >> + or if no conversion was performed (on some platforms). Ignore & >> continue >> + if no conversion was performed */ >> + if (errno != 0 && (errno != EINVAL)) > > It might be better to do: > > if (errno == ERANGE) > error (); > > In any case thanks for the fix. > Pádraig. I was thinking about that, my only concern was since we're already dealing with non-standard code, should we worry about an even weirder implementation that might return something that's not ERANGE and not EINVAL?