Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> types:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Mike Meyer" writes:
> >David O'Brien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> types:
> >> On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 02:08:07AM +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> Now, IFF the C language had a type called "boolean" that would make
> a lot of sense.
So you're advocating that the rule be dropped.
> I belive the overall purpose of style(9) is to make the code readable,
> and I happen to think that
>
> if (somerandomfunction(argthis, functionthat(something), onemore)) {
> chugchugchug(argthisa;
> }
>
> is just a tiny bit more readable than
>
> if ((somerandomfunction(argthis, functionthat(something), onemore)
> != 0) {
> chugchugchug(argthisa;
> }
I agree with you. Under the rules as they exist now, the first form
would only be valid if somerandomfunctoin returned either 0 or <true>.
<mike
--
Mike Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/
Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
