On Feb 15 2017, Jeff King <p...@peff.net> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 02:50:19PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> > That works, but the fact that we need a comment is a good sign that it's
>> > kind of gross. It's too bad stdio does not specify the return of fclose
>> > to report an error in the close _or_ any previous error. I guess we
>> > could wrap it with our own function.
>> Sure. I am happy to add something like this:
>> * closes a FILE *, returns 0 if closing and all the
>> * previous stdio operations on fp were successful,
>> * otherwise non-zero.
>> int xfclose(FILE *fp)
>> return ferror(fp) | fclose(fp);
> Yes, that's exactly what I had in mind (might be worth calling out the
> bitwise-OR, though, just to make it clear it's not a typo).
Since the order of evaluation is unspecified, it would be better to
force sequencing ferror before fclose.
Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."