Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> types:
> Ahh, but here you hit one of my pet-peeves. I hate assignments inside
> conditionals. I prefer the above written as:
> Anyway, if you want it spelled out the way I would want it:
>
> 0. No assignments in if()
>
> 1. In conditions, pointers should be explicitly compared against NULL:
>
> if (foo == NULL)
> or
> if (foo != NULL)
>
> 2. In conditions, non-interger numeric types should be explicitly compared
> to zero
>
> if (float_t == 0.0)
>
> 3. Integers need not be explicitly compared to zero:
>
> if (foo & MASK)
> not
> if ((foo & MASK) != 0)
I would like it spelled out. Since style(9) uses assignments in
conditionals in it's examples, rule 0 probably won't fly. Rule 1 and 2
are redundant.
Looking at the text in the page on -stable, I think the one-word
change from boolean to "integer" would remove the ambiguity.
Thank you,
<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
