[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [bug-gnulib] purpose of *-safer?
|
From: |
Bruno Haible |
|
Subject: |
Re: [bug-gnulib] purpose of *-safer? |
|
Date: |
Wed, 26 Jul 2006 19:01:39 +0200 |
|
User-agent: |
KMail/1.9.1 |
Jim Meyering wrote:
> Don't ever hide a conceptual write failure.
> Reporting the error is the desired behavior.
Thanks for explaining. Another argument, maybe, is that the kernel
people wouldn't have invented /dev/null if you could get the same effect
by closing the file descriptor.
It all makes sense; I'll see whether gettext is affected too.
Bruno
- Re: split stdio-safer into fopen-safer, tmpfile-safer, (continued)
- Re: split stdio-safer into fopen-safer, tmpfile-safer, Ben Pfaff, 2006/07/25
- Re: split stdio-safer into fopen-safer, tmpfile-safer, Eric Blake, 2006/07/25
- Re: [bug-gnulib] split stdio-safer into fopen-safer, tmpfile-safer, Bruno Haible, 2006/07/26
- Re: split stdio-safer into fopen-safer, tmpfile-safer, Ben Pfaff, 2006/07/26
- Re: split stdio-safer into fopen-safer, tmpfile-safer, Eric Blake, 2006/07/26
- Re: split stdio-safer into fopen-safer, tmpfile-safer, Paul Eggert, 2006/07/27
- Re: purpose of *-safer?, Bruno Haible, 2006/07/25
- Re: purpose of *-safer?, Paul Eggert, 2006/07/27
- Re: purpose of *-safer?, Jim Meyering, 2006/07/27
Re: split stdio-safer into fopen-safer, tmpfile-safer, Eric Blake, 2006/07/28