On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 01:00:13PM +0100, Nick Kew wrote: > On Monday 22 August 2005 12:13, Joe Orton wrote: > > > > OK, I guess what we really want here is an additional return code > > > APR_NOOP. NOTIMPL is inappropriate, and you've raised an objection to > > > SUCCESS. > > > > Why is ENOTIMPL inappropriate? > > Erm, because ENOTIMPL is an error, whereas this noop isn't?
Now I'm confused; all apr_status_t values other than 0 are "errors" by definition. If you mean, "because the caller can be taught to treat APR_NOOP as non-fatal", well, sure; the caller can equally be taught to treat APR_ENOTIMPL as non-fatal. joe
