+1 to remove OS_INVALID_PARM
> On Jun 18, 2016, at 2:24 PM, Vipul Rahane <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I agree. Keeping OS_EINVAL makes sense.
>
> Regards,
> Vipul Rahane
>> On Jun 18, 2016, at 12:51 PM, Christopher Collins <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> I noticed libs/os/include/os/os.h defines the following two error codes:
>>
>> OS_EINVAL = 2,
>> OS_INVALID_PARM = 3,
>>
>> Do these error codes convey different results? After a brief look
>> through the code, my impression is that they mean the same thing. If
>> that is the case, I think one of the error codes should be removed. My
>> personal preference would be to keep OS_EINVAL just because EINVAL has a
>> well understood meaning.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Chris
>
