[SR-Users] Negative return codes from functions

[Daniel-Constantin Mierla]

Hello,

yes, the return codes are interpreted in a special way, see:

- http://www.kamailio.org/wiki/cookbooks/devel/core#return

Same applies for the functions exported by the modules.

Cheers,
Daniel

On 11/02/16 13:41, Phil Lavin wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
>  
>
> Just a sanity check, really. Does Kamailio consider negative response
> codes to be false? For example, should the following log execute?
>
>  
>
> if (!foo()) { # Returns -2
>
>      x_log(“Foo is false”);
>
> }
>
>  
>
> The reason for asking here is that I’m implementing flood protection
> using pike, based off the kamailio.cfg that ships with v4.3. The logic
> is thus:
>
>  
>
> if (!pike_check_req()) {
>
>     # Do blocking
>
> }
>
>  
>
> However pike_check_req only returns -1 or -2 in the case of failure,
> never 0. The blocking code is, thus, never executed. Changing to
> explicitly check for != 1 works correctly.
>
>  
>
> Am I missing something here or is the example kamailio.cfg incorrect?
>
>  
>
>  
>
> Cheers
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
> sr-users at lists.sip-router.org
> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users

-- 
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Book: SIP Routing With Kamailio - http://www.asipto.com
http://miconda.eu

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20160211/17ff0ea8/attachment.html>