[Bug tapsets/2861] user_string fault handling

["fche at redhat dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla at sourceware dot org>]

------- Additional Comments From fche at redhat dot com  2006-06-29 01:08 -------
> Is there really a need for a caller-specified error message that would
> justify the overhead of the extra strcpy? 

Yes, as a style matter, in order to avoid setting arbitrary english strings as
values that may need to be further processed by script.
 
> I'd like to avoid changing all the current code.  How about
> 
> user_string(addr) ==> returns "<unknown>" on error

This works okay only if the returned string is simply going to be passed
straight to an english-speaking user, and not e.g. tested by the script
for its own error-detection purposes.  Plus it has no way of telling apart
legal occurrences of the fixed string "<unknown>" from the error indication.
In the absence of multiple return values and exceptions, letting the caller
specify their favorite soft-error value seems to be he next best thing.

> user_string(addr, 0) ==> same as above but prints warning

The ", 0" setting is not helpful (nor is the "0" too informative).  We
don't print run-time warnings at the present, and for good reason: they
are only noise.

> user_string(addr, 1) ==> prints error message and sets lasterr

I don't find the ", 1" is too informative.


Nevertheless, I am not strongly attached to these options, so if others
wish to voice support for hunt's suggestion, or offer new ones, please do.


-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2861

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.