Le 06/06/2013 23:58, Junio C Hamano a écrit :
> Célestin Matte writes:
>
>> So using autodie may not be a good idea.
>> But the problem is that in the current state, open() return values are
>> checked, but print ones are not, although it should be.
>
> I tried "man autodie" and tried to spot 'p
Célestin Matte writes:
> So using autodie may not be a good idea.
> But the problem is that in the current state, open() return values are
> checked, but print ones are not, although it should be.
I tried "man autodie" and tried to spot 'print' in the categories
list that shows things like ":all
Le 06/06/2013 23:13, Junio C Hamano a écrit :
> Confused. Which part of this patch moves open inside a do{} block?
> This was last touched by [9/18] but it doesn't do any such thing,
> either.
I must have failed the rebase, as the first part of the commit moved to
[14/18] because it modifies a pa
Célestin Matte writes:
> Placing the open() call inside the do{} struct will automatically close the
> filehandle if possible.
> Placing the close() call outside the do{} struct is useless and will make it
> fail systematically
> Change the error message to state that what fails is a fork(), not
Placing the open() call inside the do{} struct will automatically close the
filehandle if possible.
Placing the close() call outside the do{} struct is useless and will make it
fail systematically
Change the error message to state that what fails is a fork(), not a file
opening.
Use autodie to prop
5 matches
Mail list logo
