From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <90d40644058566409e8dd75c49fe716f@quanstro.net>
To: lucio@proxima.alt.za, 9fans@9fans.net
From: erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 11:21:08 -0500
In-Reply-To: <42aa45f7d293eb1405d891253a687a65@proxima.alt.za>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] Ogg/Vorbis ported
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 8f822334-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

>> As with exit(), it can be replaced automatically with exits() but you
>> still have to figure out what message you want in your exits().
>
> If anyone is interested, this is what I used as a compatibility shim:
>
> #include <u.h>
> #include <libc.h>
>
> void
> exit (int code) {
> 	switch (code) {
> 		case -1:
> 			exits("FAILURE");
> 		case 0:
> 			exits(0);
> 		default:
> 			exits("Unknown condition");
> 	}
> }
>
> One could instead print("%d", code), or print("FAILURE: %d", code).
>
> Two cents, please!

printing would not make sense.  neither unix nor plan 9
print exit codes.

this seems to me too complicated and not complicated enough.
on the not-complicated-enough side, to get every last program,
you would need to make exit do something like

int
exit(int r)
{
	static char buf[16];

	if(r == 0)
		exits(0);
	snprint(buf, sizeof buf, "%d", r);
	exits(buf);
}

and you would need to rewrite wait to atoi(w->msg).
this would catch programs like postfix that don't treat
exit status as a boolean.  (as god intended.)

but once you've done this, you're going half-way down
the ape path.

otoh, if you design in unix/plan 9 portability, it's too
much.

int
exits(char *s)
{
	/* missing atexits */
	exit(s && *s);
}

porting is rancid, isn't it?

- erik