Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: error_t proposal
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2019 14:25:17 -0700
Organization: None to speak of
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <lny2z1rubm.fsf@kst-u.example.com>
References: <5d03868d-22f7-4c7f-9f9b-1e70d8d8e6f2@googlegroups.com> <slrnqn1n88.cdo.grahn+nntp@frailea.sa.invalid> <270b0679-c176-4e05-9d18-6dc6dcbdb75a@googlegroups.com> <lna7biv2pg.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <0a0905d7-2c2d-45c0-b028-9de1f98fc9e0@googlegroups.com> <lnblvxthj9.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <ff9369c1-8c4b-4eb5-a21a-24a1a836b69d@googlegroups.com> <87mufhxksn.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <ln36h9tbw6.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <4b1b8896-4fa9-4904-a1dc-ef5a0cb0459b@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="bdc446bce191e4e891bf0ef7ae57c831"; logging-data="5500"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+LU/IKHxd/1zkcGgSlxWyn"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ynckU++RXzfPBO8YxZirtywwi9E= sha1:DcNEDfhGYVA4uO77rPrFtRbj3Zg=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:146083

Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> writes:
> On Friday, September 6, 2019 at 5:20:33 PM UTC-3, Keith Thompson wrote:
[...]
>> Right.  There are three ways for an implementation to conform to C11
>> with respect to Annex K:
>> 
[details snipped]
>
> Visual C++ is not defining __STDC_LIB_EXT1__.
> In case I need to create my own header I will have to check by
> compiler.

If you mean Visual C++ used as a C++ compiler, I wouldn't expect it to;
C++ hasn't copied that feature from C.  If you mean Visual C++ used as a
C compiler, I don't believe it supports C11 (or even all of C99).

If you want to define your own error type, I suggest *not* calling it
"errno_t" as C11 Annex K does.  Support for Annex K is not widespread,
and it's been proposed for removal in the next edition.

<http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1969.htm#adi>

I like the idea of a consistent error reporting convention for library
functions, but existing and widely used libraries are *not* consistent,
and that's not going to change any time soon.  What is the intended
scope of your proposal?

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Will write code for food.
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */