On Nov. 10, 2012, 10:21 p.m., Rolf Eike Beer wrote:
A simple way to verify if this is correct is check if you and the compiler
agree on the code. Run make -n in the build tree to get the full compiler
command line, then insert a -S (assuming you are using gcc) and change
the -o to point to a temporary file. This will output the assembler code.
Do this with and without your modifications and look if the result is still
the same.
yes, I've done it. They match.
bool kk1()
{
int a = 1;
int b = 2;
return (!a ^ b);
}
bool kk2()
{
int a = 1;
int b = 2;
return (!(a ^ b));
}
bool kk3()
{
int a = 1;
int b = 2;
return (!(a) ^ b);
}
kk1 and kk3 produce the same assembler output.
But the problem is if the author really wanted the parenthesis that way or not.
for example, (!a) ^ b (what gcc produces) vs. !(a ^ b) (what the author
wanted?)
- Jaime Torres
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/107213/#review21785
---
On Nov. 5, 2012, 3:13 p.m., Jaime Torres Amate wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/107213/
---
(Updated Nov. 5, 2012, 3:13 p.m.)
Review request for kdelibs.
Description
---
place some parenthesis around ! operators, with less priority than ^
operators.
place some parenthesis around = inside conditions
check for n not being null before using it
simplify if (a==true) return true else return false;
Diffs
-
khtml/khtml_caret.cpp 45fd90c
khtml/rendering/render_inline.cpp acfc1e4
khtml/rendering/render_object.cpp f37627c
solid/solid/backends/wmi/wmiopticaldisc.cpp c6e390f
Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/107213/diff/
Testing
---
I've been using this code several weeks.
Thanks,
Jaime Torres Amate
