Klugier Messages: 1099 Registered: September 2012 Location: Poland, Kraków
Senior Contributor
Hello Lugi,
Changes like you proposed all out of scope. The current behavior is with us for a very long period of time and users are used to it. The function behaves in accordance to our documentation. Also changing this behavior to what you have proposed means breaking API change, which should be avoided at all cost. You will literally break dozens of application that relays on this function.
The alternative version doesn't exist, because c++ doesn't allow to have the same functions but with different return type. Anyway, introducing new function we will pollute our API. Keep it simple stupid with one implementation is reasonable in this case.
So, at the moment you just need to align to the current behavior and handle Null as error case.
Members
Pages
Help
Register
Login
Home
