Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:79925 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 98048 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2014 18:16:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 24 Dec 2014 18:16:03 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=pierre.php@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=pierre.php@gmail.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.216.182 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: pierre.php@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.216.182 mail-qc0-f182.google.com Received: from [209.85.216.182] ([209.85.216.182:63054] helo=mail-qc0-f182.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 28/18-50910-3E20B945 for ; Wed, 24 Dec 2014 13:16:03 -0500 Received: by mail-qc0-f182.google.com with SMTP id r5so6189762qcx.27 for ; Wed, 24 Dec 2014 10:16:01 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=KW3+f8IXqcerfkuc9FPT7EQvQUMm5qII/kK/OANy0+Q=; b=EUfMolNveqEOEwxHwKaosjqW9O3IV3tAhduk4kbqudyJmrJ1hC5GmOAv0oIkh9uIWB UxX2VTpY0TO7K/7HQ+VYNnjXMPlaZxesqclpAcQV8nPJUb+UiJn4vcAHqylGWR/F/cm4 FJ86NXCkkCS/pAiXExJo5OtGQdxSycqXD7eAVYoPqr27X3OB/5BAUfjutBZGoIqPsLgG GMx+jl81eAUKm9Y20xsqLXRGTQ30wu9s/5V6BZqOYju3WRzQBtRXUf0C4AucRsUZQxP/ 2u5eqxvEk/9nk1OfUSnadoCYF31ZrUBmx/t9oh9SuXpMWngPYhwtjGT4oxRfNYmH7WIw lrEg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.224.15.78 with SMTP id j14mr57525664qaa.0.1419444960918; Wed, 24 Dec 2014 10:16:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.140.22.106 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Dec 2014 10:16:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.140.22.106 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Dec 2014 10:16:00 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <946C1B1D-30B8-4029-A5A1-73D515A017D8@ajf.me> <1419428487.29904.6.camel@kuechenschabe> <5E26F21C-EA41-43FF-8DDB-D0A985AB4197@ajf.me> Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2014 05:16:00 +1100 Message-ID: To: Levi Morrison Cc: Laruence , =?UTF-8?Q?Johannes_Schl=C3=BCter?= , PHP internals , Andrea Faulds Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bdc81ccac822b050afa48bb Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] About SUCCESS/FAILURE From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye) --047d7bdc81ccac822b050afa48bb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Dec 25, 2014 1:13 AM, "Levi Morrison" wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 10:34 AM, Andrea Faulds wrote: > > > >> On 24 Dec 2014, at 17:22, Levi Morrison wrote: > >> > >> Hmm. This thread doesn't seem to mention it, but why must failure be > >> negative? I understand the non-zero part but not negative. Aside from > >> the fact we probably have code relying on it to be negative at this > >> point is there some other reason? > > > > Hey Levi, > > > > I believe it's a convention among C APIs: 0 for success, negative for some error > > I'm asking for specific things. The reason is that some API's do a > non-zero error code; the fact that they are negative is a detail that > we should not need to care about. The values do not matter but a consistent usage across all internal APIs. --047d7bdc81ccac822b050afa48bb--