xfs-masters
[Top] [All Lists]

[xfs-masters] Re: [PATCH 2.6.18-rc4-mm3 2/2] fs/xfs: Correcting error-pr

To: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx>
Subject: [xfs-masters] Re: [PATCH 2.6.18-rc4-mm3 2/2] fs/xfs: Correcting error-prone boolean-statement
From: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2006 03:18:31 +0200
Cc: akpm@xxxxxxxx, xfs-masters@xxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20060901100745.P3186664@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <44F77653.6000606@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20060901100745.P3186664@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: xfs-masters@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: xfs-masters-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.8-1.1.fc4 (X11/20060501)
Nathan Scott wrote:

>On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 01:52:51AM +0200, Richard Knutsson wrote:
>  
>
>>From: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>>Converting error-prone statement:
>>"if (var == B_FALSE)" into "if (!var)"
>>"if (var == B_TRUE)"  into "if (var)"
>>    
>>
>
>This is my preference too, rather than the local boolean usage which
>isn't used with any consistency... but:
>
>  
>
>>Compile-tested
>>    
>>
>
>Are you using XFS on your systems?  What is your strategy for getting this
>runtime tested going to be?  Or are you delegating that responsibility? :)
>  
>
Sorry, can't say that I do. So pretty please... ;)
Seriously, I can not find a state when this may fail (if not "if (var == 
TRUE)" happend to be correct for 'var' != 0 != 1, but that is just a bug 
waiting to happend).
But please correct me if I am wrong.

>cheers.
>  
>
cu


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>