Re: Reviving discussion on error code 451

On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 09:15:39AM +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 08:27:53AM +0100,
>  Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> wrote 
>  a message of 34 lines which said:
> 
> > Let's pick 425 and fill one hole instead of increasing fragmentation.
> 
> What is the problem with "fragmentation"? We never aggregate (handle
> together) status codes and there is no "range" of codes who could be
> treated as an aggregate in
> <http://www.iana.org/assignments/http-status-codes/http-status-codes.xhtml#http-status-codes-1>.

I'd turn the question the other way around : why pick a random code in
the middle of the 4xx range ? It's much easier for implementations to
keep clean and maintainable code when things are a bit tidy than when
it's completely random . For instance, when dealing with messages
associated to error codes, it's easier to know that you covered all
those you implemented when you see that 400-431 all have a message
associated than when you have to carefully check them all one at a
time against a list. Of course there's nothing critical, it's just
that it doesn't seem to make much sense to start with a random value
far away from the previously assigned ones.

Willy

Received on Wednesday, 17 December 2014 08:46:43 UTC