On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 08:44:07PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Johan Hovold <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, May 01, 2017 at 07:17:14PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: > > >> - return ret < 0 ? ret : (count ? -ETIMEDOUT : 0); > >> + return ret < 0 ? ret : (count ? -ETIMEDOUT : wr_cnt); > > > > That's some nasty use of the ternary operator. Ditching it completely > > would be more readable. > > > > if (ret < 0) > > return ret; > > > > if (count) > > return -ETIMEDOUT; > > > > return wr_count; > > > While I agree on the first part, I would go still with one ternary at the end: > > return count ? -ETIMEDOUT : wr_count;
Ick, no, make it easy to read, we write code for developers first, the compiler second. Ditching it completly is a good idea. thanks, greg k-h
