Greg Stein wrote on Wed, May 11, 2011 at 15:35:19 -0400: > On May 11, 2011 2:05 PM, "C. Michael Pilato" <cmpil...@collab.net> wrote: > > > > On 05/11/2011 12:00 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > >... > > > > > > When wrapping apr_status_t's returned by serf, shouldn't we decorate > > > them in some way so that code that interprets them knows to look them up > > > in serf.h:SERF_ERROR_* rather than in svn_error_codes.h ? > > > > > > Not sure, perhaps a wrapper err->apr_err link that signals to > > > subr/error.c to call into serf to stringify the child link...? > > > > I'm actually not sure that Serf even provides a stringification function > at > > all. > > Good idea. I can fix that. > > > svn_error_wrap_apr() will use 'status' as the err->apr_err value, but > > will call APR's stringification function which, I would expect, would just > > drop some generic string in place (since the Serf error code range is > > outside of APR's own). Of course, there's no guarantee that Subversion's > > and Serf's error code ranges won't overlap, > > You have a guarantee :-)
Since svn_error_t.apr_err may contain either an svn error code or a serf error code, do we care to have an API that tells people which one it is? Use case: API consumers who don't log err->message and want to call svn_strerror(err->apr_err).
