Re: [dev] stderr: unnecessary?

From: Moritz Wilhelmy <crap_AT_wzff.de>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 15:21:50 +0200

I know you're trolling, but I already thought about why 0 indicates success.
Point is, it actually makes sense because you usually have either success or
failure, and in case of failure, you might need another indicator to return the
nature of the failure.
Received on Fri Jun 11 2010 - 13:21:50 UTC

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Kris Maglione: "Re: [dev] Re: XDG directories"
Previous message: David Engster: "[dev] Re: XDG directories"
In reply to: Kurt H Maier: "Re: [dev] stderr: unnecessary?"
Next in thread: pancake: "Re: [dev] stderr: unnecessary?"
Reply: pancake: "Re: [dev] stderr: unnecessary?"

Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ] [ by messages with attachments ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Fri Jun 11 2010 - 13:24:03 UTC