[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D108351: [lldb server] Tidy up LLDB server return codes and associated tests

[Raphael Isemann via Phabricator via lldb-commits]

teemperor added inline comments.


================
Comment at: lldb/tools/lldb-server/lldb-platform.cpp:289
     fprintf(stderr, "failed to create acceptor: %s", error.AsCString());
-    exit(socket_error);
+    return -1;
   }
----------------
clayborg wrote:
> Should we return error.GetError() if it is non zero? IIRC it will be the actual errno. And best to not return -1, just return 1.
> 
> ```
> uint32_t SBError::GetError() const;
> ```
If we force the caller to convert errno to an exit code, then we could also just return the `Status error` itself (and then the caller can just return 0/1 depending on success or error)? That seems more clear than returning `errno` from a function with main signature (which makes it look like it would return an exit code).


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D108351/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D108351