On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 12:37, Iván Briano (Sachiel) <sachi...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2011/2/10 <mathieu.taillefum...@free.fr>: >>> Hmm, news to me. Must have missed that memo ;) ... AFAIK, it's always >>> been if ((x) && (!y)) in EFL for over 5-10 years now... >> >> this is honsetly a minor enough point on the list - that its a close tie. i >> prefer if ((x) && (y == 3)) myself. i like to clearly group the logic >> entities >> as its clear then just what you meant in the code. >> >> It is fine by me too even if I prefer (x & (y==3)). However is there any >> reasons why the dummy variables (loop variables) should be declared in the >> core of the function ? >> > > It's the style we use. Open source projects generally like it when > people adheres > to their style with their contributions, instead of questioning it. > >> cheers >> >> Mathieu >>
If the style is bad, it should be questioned. Not saying that's the case here. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
