Posted by Thomas Mlynarczyk on 11/18/05 09:52

Hi,

It seems to be a generally adopted convention to have a function return
FALSE in case of an error. But if a function is supposed to return a boolean
anyway, one cannot distinguish anymore between the "normal" FALSE and the
"error" FALSE. So why not using NULL instead to indicate an error? Are there
drawbacks I am not aware of?

Greetings,
Thomas

[Back to original message]