Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 11 Aug 1998 13:46:44 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Luoqi Chen <luoqi@watermarkgroup.com>
To:        green@zone.syracuse.NET, luoqi@watermarkgroup.com
Cc:        archer@lucky.net, bde@zeta.org.au, current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: New softupdates code panics
Message-ID:  <199808111746.NAA29106@lor.watermarkgroup.com>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I think I understand here, you meant the association of the code would be
> (doingdirectory && newparent) ? newparent : doingdirectory
> rather that
> doingdirectory && (newparent ? newparent : doingdirectory)
> correct? And that would have been what led to the confusion.
> 
> Cheers,
> Brian Feldman
> 
Actually that's not the reason, && always has a higher associativity priority
than ?: The real reason is if both doingdirectory and newparent are boolean,
then the expression equals to doingdirectory: Let D = doingdirectory,
N = newparent, the expression is
	(DN)N + !(DN)D = DN + (!DD + !ND) = DN + D!N = D
This is no longer true if newparent and the expression are integer valued.

-lq

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199808111746.NAA29106>