Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base?

[Warner Losh]

On Mon, Jan 1, 2018 at 9:57 AM, Larry McVoy <lm at mcvoy.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 01, 2018 at 08:52:57AM -0800, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 01, 2018 at 04:14:33PM +0000, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> > > > But this is bikeshedding at this point anyway.
> > >
> > > +1
> >
> > Bike shedding is good, people learn things from it.  I never knew that
> > assert was altered by NDEBUG for example, thanks for that enlightenment
>
> Um, does the FreeBSD man page not start like the Linux man page with
>
>        If  the  macro  NDEBUG  was  defined  at the moment <assert.h> was
> last
>        included, the macro assert() generates no code, and hence does
> nothing
>        at all.
>
> ?
>

It does:
     The assert() macro may be removed at compile time by defining NDEBUG
as a
     macro (e.g., by using the cc(1) option -DNDEBUG).
and the man page is short enough that you can't really miss it.Let'


> And bikeshedding has the effect of making people hit the delete key.  I've
> deleted without reading about 80% of this thread.  So if there was signal
> in that 80%, I for one, did not get it.
>
> And the amount of back and forth on something that is this basic is sort
> of mind numbing.  As a new person on FreeBSD it doesn't show the project
> in a good light.  Just sayin.


As long as we're Just Sayin' things, I point you to the level of discourse
on LKM. Just Sayin', ya know?

Bikesheds happen in all projects. This one was just a bit nutty and
happened to happen now.

Warner