On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 9:03 AM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 18/01/2018 12:21, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>>> I'm not a fan of bool return types, in general (because "!" is often
>>> success while "< 0" is failure) and especially when there is an Error**;
>>> I disagree with commit 9d3b155186. But the function is not in an area I
>>> maintain so I'm queuing this, thanks.
>> Do you prefer "if (local_err)" and "if (errp && *errp)" ?
>
> The latter is wrong. I do prefer
Ok so my 253674981e24 missed that train too.
>
> if (local_err) {
> error_propagate(errp, local_err);
> return;
> }
>
> or maybe (but only if there is a meaning to a zero vs. positive return
> value, or if errno is an important part of the returned Error *)
>
> ret = f(..., errp);
> if (ret < 0) {
> return;
> }
>
>> I wondered once if a macro might improve this pattern but thought the
>> code would get more obscure.
>
> Eduardo had a series to avoid error_propagate, where NULL was replaced
> by a (non-NULL) IGNORED_ERRORS macro. Then you could do:
>
> f(..., errp);
> if (error_is_set(errp)) {
> return;
> }
>
> See here:
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2017-06/msg03139.html
This series never hit /master!
Reading the thread I'm not sure what was the expected outcome.
