Joel Granados <[email protected]> writes: ... >> > If the only values ever returned are non-negative (as it seems they are), >> > then it'd be far more readable to make the return type "unsigned int". >> > Otherwise, I have to wonder if some of these functions may return a >> > negative value, and write code in each caller to handle that. >> > >> >> Seems like a good idea. And: No, they are supposed to be possitive >> values. Note this will propagate into other elements of the patch as >> well. > > On the other hand, ped_disk_get_max_partition would need to return -1
Yes, but that's a different function. >From what I recall reading, your new >> > > +extern int ped_disk_get_max_partition_num(const PedDisk* disk); merely queries the code for the appropriate partition table type and always returns a non-negative number. > when it encounters an error. All possitive numbers can be valide to > express max_number_of_supported_partitions. Including 0. So a negative > number would seem natural for me to use in this case. > > 0: means that the label does no support partitions. > <0: means the number of partitions > >0: means something nasty has ocurred. _______________________________________________ parted-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/parted-devel
