Hrvoje Niksic wrote: > But I wonder if that's overengineering at work.
I don't think so. The overarching concern is to do what's "expected". As you noted elsewhere, on a Unix system, that means exit(0) in the case of success -- preferably with exit(meaningful_value) otherwise. As I recall this chain started because of the absence of a meaningful value. I think the use of a setexitcode function could easily satisfy people in the Unix world and will greatly simply people adapting wget for other operating systems. Reflecting on the exchange that you and Steven just had, I think we also need at wget_exit function that calls exit with an appropriate value. (That will allow Steven to further adapt for the VMS environment.) In that case, exit should only be called by wget_exit. By the way, when do we start on 2.0? I don't know how much time I will be able to devote to serious coding, but I'd love to participate as fully as I can in both the architecture and development. Tony
