On Jul 11, 2024, Jonathan Wakely <jwak...@redhat.com> wrote: > There's no requirement that system_error uses strerror, that's just an > implementation detail.
*nod*. I meant it was more of a libc test in the case that relied on strerror. But I fully agree that testing the C++ standard API makes perfect sense. It's just that maybe we want workarounds for cases in which we implement in terms of libc, but libc doesn't live up to the standard. Tolerating NULL returns from strerror would be an easy one; do we want that? Checking strerror acceptable ranges (that don't trigger runtime errors) before calling it, and taking an alternate path when needed, that would be harder to do, and IMHO of dubious value. -- Alexandre Oliva, happy hacker https://FSFLA.org/blogs/lxo/ Free Software Activist GNU Toolchain Engineer More tolerance and less prejudice are key for inclusion and diversity Excluding neuro-others for not behaving ""normal"" is *not* inclusive
