qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: "Eric Blake" <eblake@redhat.com>,
	"Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <f4bug@amsat.org>,
	"Fam Zheng" <famz@redhat.com>,
	"qemu-devel@nongnu.org Developers" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
	"Stefan Hajnoczi" <stefanha@redhat.com>,
	"Markus Armbruster" <armbru@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] scsi-generic: Simplify error handling code
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 20:39:47 -0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180118223947.GK5292@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <800158468.913862.1516313996908.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>

On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 05:19:56PM -0500, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> 
> ----- Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> ha scritto:
> > We can do some effort to document the preferred convention to
> > return success/failure, but I don't think we will be able to
> > convert the existing void/ret/bool functions to a single style
> > (whatever it is) in a reasonable time.
> > 
> > That said, IMO returning 0/-1 or true/false is always preferred
> > to returning void, so there's no need to add more local_err
> > boilerplate code.
> 
> I strongly prefer having one way to say things, and having return value and Error*
> (with no clear winner for return value) is a disadvantage. [...]


I sympathize with this argument.

...wait, now we're repeating the discussion from the previous
thread:

https://www.mail-archive.com/qemu-devel@nongnu.org/msg461702.html


>                                                      [...] Your solution is
> slightly more verbose in that it makes it harder to use && and ||, but I am not
> even sure it is a disadvantage.  And the clear advantage that a full conversion
> is mandatory and can be automated...

Well, even if we don't decide about void vs non-void right now,
we would still need something better to live with until a
conversion to non-void is finished.  I think I should rebase and
resubmit my ERR_IS_SET series.

-- 
Eduardo

      reply	other threads:[~2018-01-18 22:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-01-18  2:52 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] scsi-generic: Simplify error handling code Fam Zheng
2018-01-18  4:34 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2018-01-18  8:20 ` Paolo Bonzini
2018-01-18 11:21   ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2018-01-18 12:03     ` Paolo Bonzini
2018-01-18 15:55       ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2018-01-18 15:59         ` Paolo Bonzini
2018-01-18 20:34         ` Eric Blake
2018-01-18 21:38           ` Eduardo Habkost
2018-01-18 22:19             ` Paolo Bonzini
2018-01-18 22:39               ` Eduardo Habkost [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20180118223947.GK5292@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=ehabkost@redhat.com \
    --cc=armbru@redhat.com \
    --cc=eblake@redhat.com \
    --cc=f4bug@amsat.org \
    --cc=famz@redhat.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=stefanha@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).