Re: [MiNT] Dopendir() return values

[Alan Hourihane <alanh@fairlite.co.uk>]

On 11/01/11 18:30, Jean-François Lemaire wrote:
> On Tuesday 01 Nov 2011 17:39:09 Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> Alan Hourihane <alanh@fairlite.co.uk> writes:
>>> On 11/01/11 15:10, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>>>> Alan Hourihane <alanh@fairlite.co.uk> writes:
>>>>> But that wasn't the original topic. It was explaining the return values
>>>>> of Dopendir.
>>>> The point is that it does not fit with existing GEMDOS practice, which
>>>> causes confusion, obviously.
>>> Not in my eyes, the point is that it's an extension.
>>>
>>> Dopendir is a un*x'ism, so it should follow what it's trying to emulate,
>>> otherwise applications that use it, i.e. un*x apps, will fail with
>>> inappropriate errors.
>> GEMDOS errors do not exactly fit the Unix errors, and those differences
>> need to be kept in mind.
> To sum up my original query: MiNT returns -33 for a non-existing directory, 
> while the "semi-official" doc never mentions -33 as a possible value for 
> Dopendir() but any of -34, -36 and -39. This led me to write buggy code, so 
> something is wrong. Either the doc, or the returned value. I personnaly don't 
> care which one.

I think the doc needs to reflect that -33 is a valid return code.

Alan.