Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 14:37:45 -0500 From: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> Cc: "Mike Meyer" <mwm-dated-1015843484.1eabc5@mired.org>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RFC: style(9) isn't explicit about booleans for testing. Message-ID: <p05101510b8ac2005b34b@[128.113.24.47]> In-Reply-To: <26424.1015440592@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <26424.1015440592@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 7:49 PM +0100 3/6/02, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >Garance A Drosihn writes: > >In one message, >> At 12:52 AM -0800 3/6/02, David O'Brien wrote: >>>I don't think it is clarifying a rule. I think it is in fact adding >>>a rule. You are extrapolating too much I think. All the rule is >>>trying to prevent is "if (!strcmp(a,b))" which when read is extremely > >>wrong of that is actually happening. > > > >If we change boolean to integer, then the proposed rule will not >>prevent "if (!strcmp(a,b))" , because strcmp() *does* return an >>integer value. Or am I missing something here? > >Right, and since the integer is well defined, > if (!strcmp(a, b)) >is perfectly understandable so what is the problem ? Well, that's my question. David's comment implies that it is not good to do '!strcmp()', and I was wondering why it is not good... -- 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 freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p05101510b8ac2005b34b>