Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 10:52:44 -0500 From: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> To: Stephen McKay <mckay@thehub.com.au>, Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, Julian Elischer <julian@FreeBSD.org>, Greg Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org>, mckay@thehub.com.au Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/share/man/man3 queue.3 Message-ID: <p05101000b858dc1a097e@[128.113.24.47]> In-Reply-To: <200201021440.g02Eess11512@dungeon.home> References: <20011231165233.A408@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0112311706450.10883-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> <200201021440.g02Eess11512@dungeon.home>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 12:40 AM +1000 1/3/02, Stephen McKay wrote:
>On Tuesday, 1st January 2002, Julian Elischer wrote:
> > I'm just documenting what the code does, and how people have used it.
> > if you think that phk is correct we should add an example to the man
> > page showing:
>
>Perhaps Marcel's good example instead:
>
>> TAILQ_FOREACH(p, &list, p_next) {
>> if (some_test_on(p)) {
>> /* Do something */
>> break; /* optional */
>> }
>> }
>
>The man page should explicitly state that p is undefined after the loop
>completes unless the user breaks out. Oh, and explicitly stating that
>it is OK to break out at all might be nice too. :-)
Perhaps I am missing something, but this issue seems pretty simple to
me. What's wrong with:
keyp = NULL;
TAILQ_FOREACH(p, &list, p_next) {
if (some_test_on(p)) {
keyp = p;
break; /* optional */
}
}
and then using 'keyp' outside the loop?
--
Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@eclipse.acs.rpi.edu
Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p05101000b858dc1a097e>