From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Michael Kerrisk" Subject: Report bugs for variations in error handling in math functions? Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 12:14:05 +0200 Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-man-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: libc-alpha-9JcytcrH/bA+uJoB2kUjGw@public.gmane.org Cc: Andreas Jaeger , Andries Brouwer , linux-man-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-man@vger.kernel.org Currently, I'm revising all of the math pages in man-pages, and in the process testing the error handling (glibc 2.8) for each function. I find the following: a) on error, many (probably a majority of) functions set errno AND raise an exception (fetestexcept()). b) on error, a very few functions DO set errno but DON"T raise an exception (fetestexcept()). c) on error, a few functions DON'T set errno but DO raise an exception (fetestexcept()). d) on error, a very few functions pursue a mixture of all of the above, depending on the error. A math_error(7) page that I recently wrote (see http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/online/pages/man7/math_error.7.html ) currently implies that all functions should do a). Clearly I'll need to amend that. But the main question is, should I raise glibc bugs for the functions in cases b), c), and d)? Cheers, Michael -- Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ man-pages online: http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/online_pages.html Found a bug? http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/reporting_bugs.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html