08 12 | 2011

Return codes

Written by Tanguy

Classified in : Homepage, Debian, Command line, Grumble

According to Eric S. Raymond, one rule for Unix programming is the Rule of Silence: When a program has nothing surprising to say, it should say nothing. Since return codes are a form of information, I would like to add: when a program has carried out its task with no surprise, it should exit(0).

Take xscreensaver-command -lock, for instance. That command is meant to make a running XScreenSaver to lock the screen. I have never seen it fail in doing so, however I sometimes get a non-zero code:

% xscreensaver -lock
xscreensaver-command: could not frobnicate window 4212
zsh: exit 1   xscreensaver-command -lock

Well, xscreensaver-command, I have the deep regret to announce you that despite of your surprising return code, you successfully succeeded to lock my screen. But that return code is wrong and annoying. Wrong, because as a user, I do not care if xscreensaver-command -lock failed to frobnicate some window he would have loved to as long as it does its job and locks my screen. To the user's point of view, locking the screen is binary: either it is done and it is a success or it is not done and that is a failure. And it is annoying, because it makes the return code meaningless and prevents you from using it to do things like:

% # Lock screen and suspend to RAM (only if locking was successful)
% xscreensaver -lock && sudo pm-suspend

With xscreensaver-command sometimes returning a non-zero code with no apparent reason, you end with a locked screen and your computer still running, and have to unlock it and try again. This looks like this meaningless dialogue:

  • Scott to bridge.
  • Kirk here. Scotty, could you restore impulse power?
  • I'm sorry captain, I was not able to align the coaxial stabilizers, we just sustained too much damage here.
  • How long would it take to get that power back?
  • But you have it captain! Impulse power is working all right, it's just that…
  • Good job Scotty, do you think will hold long enough?
  • Well, I'd say it should hold until our next scheduled revision if we take care, but captain, I could not align…

So please, when you write a utility, design your return code for the user, not for you. If your utility has done the job, it should exit(0). What happened inside does may interest you as the developer but it does not matter to the user as long as the job is done, so it should not be reported to him, especially not with a misleading failure code.

3 comments

thursday 08 december 2011 à 22:58 Tanguy said : #1

PS: Yes, that xscreensaver-command error (I cannot tell the exact message now since I have only seen it at my office and I did not note it yet) is probably a bug and I should probably report it when I have collected enough information about it.

friday 09 december 2011 à 00:05 Zack said : #2

I want to suggest the possiblity that, when this happens, the screen only <i>appears</i> to be locked; perhaps there is something the program that controls window 4212 could still do, that it shouldn't be able to do while the screen is locked.

This is totally hypothetical on my part, and comes mostly from my expectation that jwz is the sort of person who would get the exit code behavior of his programs right.

friday 09 december 2011 à 08:38 Tanguy said : #3

@Zack: Yes, that is right; as I said this is probably a bug either way since something is going wrong, either the return code or the screen locking, and in that case, the error message should at least be understandable. I only took it as an example of how that can be annoying.

Write a comment

What is the last letter of the word vwqdub? : 

Archives