On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 9:02 AM, Jan Safranek <jsafr...@redhat.com> wrote: > It's not strictly necessary to check return values of these functions, we > already check *result!=NULL, which seems to be enough. But gcc complains > about set-but-unused variable, so one additional check won't harm. >
I think its more of a taste issue, but since we do not care about the "error" because if the result is null, we can't do anything about it, why not just drop the error variable? Dhaval ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Get a FREE DOWNLOAD! and learn more about uberSVN rich system, user administration capabilities and model configuration. Take the hassle out of deploying and managing Subversion and the tools developers use with it. http://p.sf.net/sfu/wandisco-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Libcg-devel mailing list Libcg-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libcg-devel
