On Thu, 27 Oct 2016 10:02:32 +0200 Anselm R Garbe <[email protected]> wrote:
Hey Anselm, > To me ! is logical NOT and your suggestion relies on the fact that > XUrgencyHint is a single bit flag? no? > I prefer the original code, as it doesn't use side effects of logical > NOTs. this is exactly what was checked with the ternary operator. The bitmask-result is also "so to say" casted to a boolean value, and !! is inverse-idempotent on booleans, which means that we are save here. I prefer Markus' approach, but it's your decision as a maintainer. Cheers Laslo -- Laslo Hunhold <[email protected]>
