On Feb 11, 2013, at 20:32, Pádraig Brady <address@hidden> wrote:
On 02/11/2013 08:47 PM, Assaf Gordon wrote:
- if (errno != 0)
+ /* EINVAL can happen if 'base' is invalid (hardcoded as 10, so can't happen),
+ or if no conversion was performed (on some platforms). Ignore & continue
+ if no conversion was performed */
+ if (errno != 0 && (errno != EINVAL))
It might be better to do:
if (errno == ERANGE)
error ();
In any case thanks for the fix.
Pádraig.
I was thinking about that, my only concern was since we're already dealing with
non-standard code, should we worry about an even weirder implementation that
might return something that's not ERANGE and not EINVAL?