From owner-freebsd-audit Thu May 16 6:11:11 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-audit@freebsd.org Received: from south.nanolink.com (south.nanolink.com [217.75.134.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 10FBF37B405 for ; Thu, 16 May 2002 06:11:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 57521 invoked from network); 16 May 2002 13:18:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO straylight.ringlet.net) (212.116.140.125) by south.nanolink.com with SMTP; 16 May 2002 13:18:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 6346 invoked by uid 1000); 16 May 2002 13:10:24 -0000 Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 16:10:24 +0300 From: Peter Pentchev To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Cc: Giorgos Keramidas , Bruce Evans , Mike Makonnen , freebsd-audit@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RFC: Port of NetBSD cat(1)'s -f option. Message-ID: <20020516161024.G349@straylight.oblivion.bg> Mail-Followup-To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav , Giorgos Keramidas , Bruce Evans , Mike Makonnen , freebsd-audit@FreeBSD.ORG References: <20020515211758.GB68380@hades.hell.gr> <20020516164332.B1704-100000@gamplex.bde.org> <20020516134044.A349@straylight.oblivion.bg> <20020516152345.E349@straylight.oblivion.bg> <20020516124343.GA93634@hades.hell.gr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-md5; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="5L6AZ1aJH5mDrqCQ" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: ; from des@ofug.org on Thu, May 16, 2002 at 03:02:13PM +0200 Sender: owner-freebsd-audit@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG --5L6AZ1aJH5mDrqCQ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 03:02:13PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > Giorgos Keramidas writes: > > I'm not sure. The < 0 check is almost hardwired in my fingers, > > because of a few years of writing it this way. Just trying to be on > > the safe side of the world, I guess. >=20 > It's also a single instruction (+ a flag check) on most architectures, > while an explicit comparison is at least two, and possibly trashes a > register. >=20 > That being said, I use =3D=3D -1 myself - but I don't think < 0 is wrong, > just different. As long as we're consistent, I don't care. It was exactly about being consistent that I first brought this up; IMO, at least within FreeBSD, being consistent would be =3D=3D -1. G'luck, Peter --=20 Peter Pentchev roam@ringlet.net roam@FreeBSD.org PGP key: http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc Key fingerprint FDBA FD79 C26F 3C51 C95E DF9E ED18 B68D 1619 4553 What would this sentence be like if it weren't self-referential? --5L6AZ1aJH5mDrqCQ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE846+/7Ri2jRYZRVMRAnP1AJ9ceMF/6Vf6EF7Odn9KEYMnuDyuqgCeOFZD cDM/GMWWQYaTP7GjeR938Ck= =LwcT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --5L6AZ1aJH5mDrqCQ-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-audit" in the body of the message