Update of patch #5683 (project pspp):
Status: Ready For Test/Review => Works For Me
Assigned to: jmd => blp
_______________________________________________________
Follow-up Comment #1:
I prefer
assert (condition1);
assert (condition2);
rather than assert (condition1 && condition2) simply because if the
assertion(s) ever fail, the former makes it instantly clear which condition
has been violated. The latter requires extra investigation using the
debugger or something.
In NAME##_init, where you have written
deque->capacity *= 2
I would have put
deque->capacity <<= 1
I guess any half decent compiler would create the same code, but I think it
makes the intent clearer.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<http://savannah.gnu.org/patch/?5683>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via/by Savannah
http://savannah.gnu.org/
_______________________________________________
pspp-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pspp-dev
