Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 18 Aug 2006 15:41:51 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: Complaint about return code convention in queue_work() etc. |
| |
On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 17:43:18 -0400 Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org> wrote:
> Alan Stern wrote: > > I'd like to lodge a bitter complaint about the return codes used by > > queue_work() and related functions: > > > > Why do the damn things return 0 for error and 1 for success??? > > Why don't they use negative error codes for failure, like > > everything else in the kernel?!! > > It's a standard programming idiom: return false (0) for failure, true > (non-zero) for success. Boolean. > > Certainly the kernel often uses the -errno convention, but it's not a rule. >
The predominant convention in the kernel is 0==success and I do think that the change which Alan suggests would be kinder to the principle-of-least-surprise.
But if you're going to change the function's return conventions, please also rename the function.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |