Eric Wilhelm wrote:
But you didn't succeed because something's wrong and thus on the way out
you must mention to the poor user what that might be. I suppose if we
had a leave() function, you could get something like 'warn can't
install without ...; exit 0' from 'leave can't install without
Eric Wilhelm wrote:
# from David Cantrell
# on Wednesday 06 January 2010 03:48:
Exiting with a 0 status would seem to be the least clunky solution.
exit(0) means Stop now and claim to have succeeded
But you didn't succeed because something's wrong and thus on the way out
you must mention to
# from David Cantrell
# on Saturday 09 January 2010 07:44:
Fine, but if you *don't* claim to have succeeded, then you have to
expect that software that looks for failures will spot the failure and
report it.
As the author's fault? Right.
--Eric
--
perl -e 'srand; print join( ,sort({rand()
On Sat, Jan 09, 2010 at 11:48:19AM -0800, Eric Wilhelm wrote:
# from David Cantrell
# on Saturday 09 January 2010 07:44:
Fine, but if you *don't* claim to have succeeded, then you have to
expect that software that looks for failures will spot the failure and
report it.
As the author's fault?
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 10:53:22AM -0800, Eric Wilhelm wrote:
# from David Cantrell
Mmmm, more special cases. From a user's (ie, a module author's) point
of view, isn't it easier to remember exit(0) than to remember
exactly what message to spit out?
Easier to remember, maybe. But the
# from David Cantrell
# on Wednesday 06 January 2010 03:48:
Exiting with a 0 status would seem to be the least clunky solution.
exit(0) means Stop now and claim to have succeeded
But you didn't succeed because something's wrong and thus on the way out
you must mention to the poor user what that
* Eric Wilhelm enoba...@gmail.com [2010-01-06 18:15]:
But you didn't succeed because something's wrong
The Makefile is not missing because the program crashed before
it managed to generate one. It is missing because the program
successfully determined that installation cannot proceed. The
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:46:07PM -0800, Eric Wilhelm wrote:
# from Burak Gürsoy
# on Monday 14 December 2009 12:20:
Well... Either die OS unsupported\n is an exception (since I get NA
for that)
That's special-cased for Hysterical Raisins.
Yeah. Makes me wonder why fatal m/^Unsupported
# from David Cantrell
# on Wednesday 16 December 2009:
Makes me wonder why fatal m/^Unsupported configuration: .*/
errors couldn't be made NA.
Mmmm, more special cases. From a user's (ie, a module author's) point
of view, isn't it easier to remember exit(0) than to remember
exactly what
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 2:46 AM, Eric Wilhelm enoba...@gmail.com wrote:
# from Burak Gürsoy
# on Monday 14 December 2009 12:20:
Well... Either die OS unsupported\n is an exception (since I get NA
for that)
Yeah. Makes me wonder why fatal m/^Unsupported configuration: .*/
errors couldn't be
# from Burak Gürsoy
# on Monday 14 December 2009 12:20:
Well... Either die OS unsupported\n is an exception (since I get NA
for that)
Yeah. Makes me wonder why fatal m/^Unsupported configuration: .*/
errors couldn't be made NA.
--Eric
--
Issues of control, repair, improvement, cost, or just
11 matches
Mail list logo
