Hello,
Rick McGuire wrote:
> It looks like the fact these were not getting called was my fault. In
> previous releases, the rxsock package registered all of the functions
> using the same DLL entry point. When called, it searched a table and
> dispatched the call to the actual target. This was a bit strange, and
> the gateway function was removed when this got converted to the new
> package format. I completely missed the fact that the gateway also
> did some termination work on behalf of each function. I'll need to
> fix that.
>
>
OK
> As for the value used for SetH_Errno(), it appears to have always been
> that way. There's nothing in the comments to indicate why this was
> done, so I'm not really sure what should be done there.
>
>
This function is a bit strange.
1. What the hack is 1541 ??
2. I think someone planed to somehow "condense" the errors into "meta"
errors but never finished the work...
> Rick
>
>
Bye
Rainer*
*
> On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 3:57 AM, Rainer Tammer<tam...@tammer.net> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>> I just read ID: 2821430.
>>
>> Is it possible that this is not implemented at all?
>>
>> I can find SetErrno() and SetH_Errno() in rxsock.cpp.
>> These two functions are never called.
>>
>> The SetH_Errno() looks kinda fake:
>>
>> /*------------------------------------------------------------------
>> * set h_errno
>> *------------------------------------------------------------------*/
>> void SetH_Errno(void)
>> {
>> char szBuff[20];
>> const char *pszErrno = szBuff;
>> int theErrno;
>>
>> theErrno = 1541; // <-------------------------- FAKE ALARM
>>
>> switch (theErrno)
>> {
>> case HOST_NOT_FOUND : pszErrno = "HOST_NOT_FOUND"; break;
>> case TRY_AGAIN : pszErrno = "TRY_AGAIN"; break;
>> case NO_RECOVERY : pszErrno = "NO_RECOVERY"; break;
>> case NO_ADDRESS : pszErrno = "NO_ADDRESS"; break;
>>
>> default:
>> sprintf(szBuff,"%d",theErrno);
>> }
>>
>> RxVarSet("h_errno",pszErrno);
>> }
>>
>> This function always set h_errno to 1541.
>>
>> The SetErrno() looks better but no one calls it...
>>
>> Is this intended ?
>> Is this a leftover ?
>>
>> ------------
>>
>> The ooRexx RxSock 3.2 documentation says:
>>
>> Chapter 4. Special Variables
>> The following variables are maintained by the system: errno and h_errno.
>> ...
>>
>> What's your opinion ??
>>
>> Bye
>> Rainer
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> Oorexx-devel mailing list
>> Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
>>
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Oorexx-devel mailing list
> Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Oorexx-devel mailing list
Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
