X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f X-Recipient: djgpp AT delorie DOT com X-Recipient: dj AT delorie DOT com X-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=/iDHsTE3XBibVA5HGuholdyIroxrGibjWGIjfzeiqMo=; b=Rqnh3T5HQpPe h6rz2+C4MK7awPeHJlY0u/1jh7h/2sgKOwbUnxjsE1sjqrI5o0bGiVQIZHJPoqRk10/2s7pdu4s6t Tc/MoOZEqaD66WWsdUOa/zSXcPYoXw2UdDQiZscejlEMRMc22772gtSlBuxiv4xHY1JmJV+yHYWvo m6DGP9P5N8DR8GfIEm8vbNioqwjVvo2qU667yORmOsATdm76bRoyfWXcx77bQTQslX5UXPTkp89R3 KN3iPuYPydSq4IwjVSH3rOOZTMIefwOuZplhq+VD/9kdXZ8knJcV8PDaFEA6Fyyt4JzRE8+c/wGiz DMBvZH3a2trhr1F6Hayq/Q==; Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2024 13:28:20 +0300 Message-Id: <86sezome63.fsf@gnu.org> From: "Eli Zaretskii (eliz AT gnu DOT org) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]" To: Pali Cc: dj AT delorie DOT com, sezeroz AT gmail DOT com, djgpp AT delorie DOT com In-Reply-To: <20240414100331.yv4eqcr2ruhfbslk@pali> (message from Pali on Sun, 14 Apr 2024 12:03:31 +0200) Subject: Re: Error handling in __djgpp_set_page_attributes() References: <20240413103741 DOT wpz7cy3ff3uaflo6 AT pali> <86edb9pjka DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <20240413120109 DOT bbs63syonlprvmw4 AT pali> <865xwlpio5 DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <20240413122345 DOT sq2ua43ugmshrlhv AT pali> <86v84lntr7 DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <20240413225744 DOT sxdwqpaipq5acj3n AT pali> <86h6g4o638 DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <20240414082932 DOT pm4hht4c5agcysou AT pali> <861q78nuk3 DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <20240414100331 DOT yv4eqcr2ruhfbslk AT pali> Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk > Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2024 12:03:31 +0200 > From: Pali > Cc: dj AT delorie DOT com, sezeroz AT gmail DOT com, djgpp AT delorie DOT com > > I would propose to also update documentation for this function > __djgpp_set_page_attributes to include all important information. I think it's too much detail. We never describe errno values in such detail anywhere else, do we? It's also a maintenance burden: "Someone" will need to make sure the documentation is updated when the code changes. Why did you think this was important to spell out?