> > Yes, assignment to errno is fine. > > Please see patch 505846. > > I haven't supplied this patch in proper form yet, but this > discussion relates to the patch. > > I would like to remind folks that on some platforms, one cannot just > use "errno = 0". On those platforms calling a function is required > to set errno. Shucks. That's in violation of the ISO C standard. > The point of patch 505846 is to "standardized" the "errno = " > function, and secondarily provide a way to "get" the errno. This is > done in pyport.h and "all modules" that use or set errno. (not as > many as you might think) Why also provide an alternative way to get it? Sure you can *get* it even on Win/CE? > It's an ugly patch, requires a lot of changes to the core. I'm > willing to make all the changes to the core as needed, once we > figure out the best way to handle this issue is. I have a strong urge to tell you to start porting Linux to your CE hardware rather than bothering with Win/CE. Or buy an iPAQ for which Linux is already available. > In fact, it's this patch that is the principal cause of the "fork > python ce" thread also recently discussed in this forum. See "Need > advice: cloning python cvs for CE project" I've given all the advice I have time for. > Windows CE doesn't allow setting errno. Neither does NetWare (CLIB). Sigh. > Is it worthwhile to discuss patch 505846 some more in this thread? > Perhaps those who haven't read the comments on the patch have a > clever solution? > > Or should I just clean up my patch, resubmit it and move on? > > I agree with Mark's post about keeping CE changes in the core. I'd > rather do that. I submitted patch 505846 incorrectly and need to fix > it.. But after it's submitted and if accepted, core developers would > need to use Py_SetErrno instead of "errno = " Except in extensions that don't have a snowball in hell's chance of working on Win/CE, of course. > And for extension developers. Using the macro would be nice, but > it's less of an issue since CE and NetWare ports have to be done "by > hand" anyway for these modules, we can make those changes as they're > encountered. > > So .. discuss this, look for better insight, or resubmit the patch > and move on? As I said, I have a very strong urge to tell you to go away. But I won't. But I really don't like the idea of coding around this particular platform's quirks. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4