On Tue, 4 Jan 2011 08:58:48 -0800, Garrett Cooper <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> + errno = 0; >>>> + res = strtol(str, &endp, 10); >>>> + if (errno != 0 || endp == str || *endp != '\0') >>>> + err(1, "%s shall be a number", errname); >>> >>> Small nit, maybe use 'must' instead of 'shall'. >> >> it seems at some point there has been a massive usage of the term >> 'shall' in manual pages, which people tried to get rid of. hence the >> 'usr/share/examples/mdoc/deshallify.sh' script. > > I know shall is used widely by opengroup when describing definitions > and interfaces in the POSIX standards, but the connotation in English > is very squishy, so I agree with John that must would be better. > > BTW, only if errno was non-zero would using err(3) be > logical. Otherwise it will just produce noise :).
That's a good point. I think we should change err() to errx() there. _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
