On Wed, 2016-02-10 at 16:24 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 4:15 PM, Oliver Neukum <oneu...@suse.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2016-02-10 at 13:56 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >> > +err:
> >> > + if (i > 0)
> >> > + for (; i >= 0; i--, con--)
> >> > + typec_unregister_port(con->port);
> >>
> >> Perhaps
> >>
> >> while (--i >= 0) {
> >> ...
> >> }
> >
> > While we are at it. No we should not change the semantics
> > of conditionals for the sake of appearance.
>
> I'm sorry I didn't get you.
> How this more or less standard pattern to clean up stuff on error path
> does with conditional semantics?
You change a postdecrement to a predecrement. The highest
number the loop is executed for is changed.
Oliver
