On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 9:16 PM, Peter Hutterer <[email protected]> wrote: > +/** > + * Flip the mask bit in buttons corresponding to btn to the specified state. > + * > + * @param buttons The current button mask > + * @param btn Zero-indexed button number to change > + * @param state Zero to unset, non-zero to set the mask for the button > + * > + * @return The new button mask > + */ > +static int mod_buttons(int buttons, int btn, int state) > +{ > + int mask = 1 << btn; > + > + if (btn >= sizeof(int)) > + { > + xf86Msg(X_ERROR, "%s: Invalid button number %d. Insufficient " > + "storage\n", __func__, btn); > + return buttons; > + } > + > + if (state) > + buttons |= mask; > + else > + buttons &= ~mask; > + > + return buttons; > +} >
Would it be too nitpicky of me to want the shift occuring after the test? I do prefer it when functions fail as fast as possible... Jason --- Day xee-nee-svsh duu-'ushtlh-ts'it; nuu-wee-ya' duu-xan' 'vm-nvshtlh-ts'it. Huu-chan xuu naa~-gha. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Enable your software for Intel(R) Active Management Technology to meet the growing manageability and security demands of your customers. Businesses are taking advantage of Intel(R) vPro (TM) technology - will your software be a part of the solution? Download the Intel(R) Manageability Checker today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmar _______________________________________________ Linuxwacom-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxwacom-devel
