[libcxx-commits] [PATCH] D56398: Add new EINTEGRITY errno

[Louis Dionne via Phabricator via libcxx-commits]

ldionne added a comment.

In D56398#1744453 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D56398#1744453>, @dim wrote:

> In D56398#1744265 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D56398#1744265>, @ldionne wrote:
>
> > Sorry if this is a basic question, but why are we trying to provide `EINTEGRITY` in libc++'s `errno.h` header at all? I don't see this being part of the C or C++ Standard.
>
>
> That is a very good question, this review has been sitting for so long that the reason also slipped my mind. :)  @emaste any idea?  As far as I remember, this "new" errno value was added by Kirk McKusick after he added integrity checks to the BSD FFS file system, and I suspect he just went through all headers that referred to file system specific errno values to extend them.
>
> That said, doesn't libc++'s errno.h also provide lots of errno values that are not standardized anywhere? (I'm not even sure if there *is* a standardized list of "must support" errno values...)


I'd ask the same question. Actually, more generally, why does libc++ even provide `errno.h`? Shouldn't we simply assume the C Standard library implementation to provide one? I have the impression that this sort of header cleverness just provides us with a blessed location to insert platform-specific hacks, instead of actually making those platforms conforming. But I don't really understand the context, so I might be wrong and maybe `<errno.h>` is important in libc++.


Repository:
  rCXX libc++

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D56398/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D56398