Re: LDAP C API: error handling

["Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.Org>]

Mark Wahl wrote:
> A standards-track document can't say that the client SHOULD use an
> implementation-specific mechanism to obtain this information.

Okay.

> Either we define the behavior.

I do not object to defining the behavior.

> we use operating-specific mechanisms (where applicable),

I'm on Windows: X implementation reports via errno,  Y uses _doserr,
Z uses GetLastError(). A uses WSAGetLastError, B uses ..., C uses...,
...

Now, which implementation is using THE operating system specific
mechanism?  I am sure only one implementor will be happy with
your choice.  Or is the choice implementation specific?

> or we say that obtaining additional information is the
> subject of future standards work.

Which leaves it "implementation specific" in the meantime.

> Where the first option is too difficult at present,

It's not necessarily difficult, but something that would require
additional review beyond that of the last call deadline.

> I would lean toward the second option.

The second option is equivalent to "implementation specific".

> Implementation
> specific error reporting doesn't work when the run-time LDAP library is not
> the same as the build-time LDAP library, and many modern operating environments
> support dynamic linking.

We have mechanisms to detect API mismatches...