Is TINFL_FLAG_HAS_MORE_INPUT necessary?

[Plecra]

miniz_oxide/miniz_oxide/src/inflate/core.rs

Lines 600 to 607 in 7f5aedd

	#[inline]
	fn end_of_input(flags: u32) -> Action {
	Action::End(if flags & TINFL_FLAG_HAS_MORE_INPUT != 0 {
	TINFLStatus::NeedsMoreInput
	} else {
	TINFLStatus::FailedCannotMakeProgress
	})
	}

It seems like the flag only serves to rename the NeedsMoreInput variant to FailedCannotMakeProgress at runtime. Both of the errors only seem to be created in this function. The API doesn't seem to do much but confuse users, so could it be removed? (NeedsMoreInput is a perfectly reasonable error state if the caller already knows there's no more input)

[oyvindln]

Not sure, will have to look into it, some of these flags are remnants from porting miniz from C.