Re: [AD] documenting minor return values

[Peter Wang <tjaden@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 11 Oct 2001, Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Some return values are undocumented, or left undefined purposely.
> 
> What do you mean by 'purposely' ? If the functions are guaranteed to
> never fail, why do they return a value ?

Maybe some return values weren't meant to be part of the public API?
e.g. they might be used internally, and be subject to change.  I don't
any of the ones I listed are like that, though.

> I think we should document everything.

If return values are documented, that implies that we *should* be
checking them.  I'd rather not check `install_timer', etc.  Making
them return `void' might be considered breaking the API.
Alternatively, we can say "The return value is unspecified.", which
is fine by me, but I'm sure some purists here would disagree ;-)