Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 00:46:45 -0800 (PST) From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> Cc: Stephen McKay <mckay@thehub.com.au>, John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, Julian Elischer <julian@FreeBSD.org>, Greg Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/share/man/man3 queue.3 Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0201030044520.22265-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <1540.1009996129@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 2 Jan 2002, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <Pine.BSF.4.21.0201020933320.19204-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>, Ju > lian Elischer writes: > > >how about explicitly detailing that it's NULL at the end? > >Doesn't that also work? > > I don't think we should document that. > > There are types of lists/queues which doesn't naturally end with > that condition. That is why we have the FOO_EMPTY() clause, although > people tend to also rely on > > if (FOO_FIRST(...) == NULL) > /* nothing to do */ Since TAILQ_FIRST== NULL is a termination (it's empty) condition (as is TAILQ_NEXT() == NULL) it makes PERFECT sense that a completed set of iterations ends up with the pointer being NULL. Sometimes I reckon you are bloody minded just for the sheer fun of it.. > > -- > Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 > phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 > FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe > Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. > 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?Pine.BSF.4.21.0201030044520.22265-100000>