Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 19:27:12 +0800 From: Igor Podlesny <poige@morning.ru> To: Peter Pentchev <roam@orbitel.bg> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re[2]: Flight of the rat, living wreck..... Message-ID: <1806975199.20010630192712@morning.ru> In-Reply-To: <20010630140907.A947@ringworld.oblivion.bg> References: <754836544.20010630185133@morning.ru> <20010630140907.A947@ringworld.oblivion.bg>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> // so here we start looking through the queue
>>
>> > ia != NULL
>>
>> // sanity (I'd have written just (ia))
> Yep, just (ia) would have worked, but style(9) mandates (ia != NULL),
> which is much easier to understand
:)
Don't want to dispute about the 'right' style :), but :))
I prefer to say (read, write)
if (it_is_okay) {
...
}
and not
if (it_is_okay != 0) {
...
}
and the first is much more like using '? :', instead of 'if'. this is
the C-spirit :)
BTW, what do u think bout goto? ;))
(it's a joke, man 8-)
What's concerning to showing differences between flags and pointers,
if (the_next_node) {
}
if (the_next_node != NULL) {
}
yes, may be this is valuable, but practice shows that if you need to
understand the code, you're to see the declarations and definitions.
At least, you're to understand the context... And it's like dispute
about Microsoft style (LPSRZ, achMyCharArray) and so on... in common
words, the code shouldn't be written for all (this would be too
expensive and stupid) it's to be written for programmers. My opinion:
Programming languages are already too formalized, so syntax sugar is
worth adding. :)
> and follow at a glance (clearly
> showing that ia is not a flag, but a pointer).
> G'luck,
> Peter
p.s. Peter, it was off-topic :)
--
Igor mailto:poige@morning.ru
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1806975199.20010630192712>