Re: Bad implementation of Status error checking

[Paul J. Lucas]

Also, it seems that isSuccess() is wrong.  In reading RFC 2616, 1xx  
and 3xx codes are not errors, so they should be considered success  
codes, no?

- Paul

On Jan 16, 2008, at 10:09 AM, Paul J. Lucas wrote:

What if I want to make up my own Status codes?  The isSuccess() and  
is*Error() methods do explicit code checks.  Why?  Why isn't the  
implementation for, say, isSuccess() this:

        return code >= 200 && code < 300;

?