"William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > What if 3 different files in the tree (scattered about) are > > un-removable for different reasons? This function still removes > > everything else and finishes its recursion. Which of the three status > > codes should it return? > > The first it encountered. > > Here's the scenario... > > path/to/some/where/file > > If we remove 'some', and fail at file due to EACCESS, we will fail > at 'where' as well since it contains files, and at 'some' since it > contains a directory. We don't care that we failed because files > remain, we care why that file remains in the first place.
Sorry, I'm still not following you. Your explanation makes me think that as *soon* as any object returns a remove-error, all recursion should immediately return. This contradicts the earlier goal of "delete everything it can anyway" -- which implies finishing the whole depth-first search and just caching any remove-errors along the way. So which design do we want? Return-on-first-error, or Return-with-a-list-of-errors?
