Oh I see... Thanks for the info.
cheers! On Monday, November 24, 2014 2:46:11 PM UTC+5:30, Saúl Ibarra Corretgé wrote: > > On 11/24/2014 07:43 AM, Ashish wrote: > > > > > > I suppose we don't need to call uv_close when on_connect (callback of > > uv_tcp_connect) receives a non-zero status value. (Because status > > nonzero indicates some error. So no handle was created, hence no need to > > call uv_close) > > > > But just want to be sure on this. > > > > Yes, you need to call uv_close. The only case when you can skip uv_close > is if uv_?_init fails. > > There is a little exception to this rule with process handles: > uv_process_init doesn't exist, so if uv_spawn fails you always have to > close uv_close. > > > Cheers, > > -- > Saúl Ibarra Corretgé > bettercallsaghul.com > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "libuv" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/libuv. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
