On Thu, 2013-04-11 at 13:56 +0200, Bjørn Mork wrote:
> I felt I had to share this little gem
> which showed up in drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_vidi.c:
>
> static int vidi_power_on(struct vidi_context *ctx, bool enable)
> {
> struct exynos_drm_subdrv *subdrv = &ctx->subdrv;
> s
Dave Jones writes:
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 03:57:51PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 09 Apr 2013 20:17:14 -0700 Joe Perches wrote:
> >
> > > Comparisons of A to true and false are better written
> > > as A and !A.
> > >
> > > Bleat a message on use.
> >
> > hm. I'm counting
On Thu, 2013-04-11 at 11:19 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 10:14:15PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> > It would be interesting to see how many people have historically screwed
> > up and used (!a) when they mean (a) and vice versa, versus spelling
> > it out longform. I'd be su
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 10:14:15PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 03:57:51PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 09 Apr 2013 20:17:14 -0700 Joe Perches wrote:
> >
> > > Comparisons of A to true and false are better written
> > > as A and !A.
> > >
> > > Bleat a mess
On Wed, 2013-04-10 at 22:14 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> It would be interesting to see how many people have historically screwed
> up and used (!a) when they mean (a) and vice versa, versus spelling
> it out longform. I'd be surprised if the results weren't skewed
> in favour of the more verbose f
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 03:57:51PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 09 Apr 2013 20:17:14 -0700 Joe Perches wrote:
>
> > Comparisons of A to true and false are better written
> > as A and !A.
> >
> > Bleat a message on use.
>
> hm. I'm counting around 1,100 instances of "== true" a
On Wed, 2013-04-10 at 15:57 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 09 Apr 2013 20:17:14 -0700 Joe Perches wrote:
> > Comparisons of A to true and false are better written
> > as A and !A.
> > Bleat a message on use.
> hm. I'm counting around 1,100 instances of "== true" and "== false".
And about
On Tue, 09 Apr 2013 20:17:14 -0700 Joe Perches wrote:
> Comparisons of A to true and false are better written
> as A and !A.
>
> Bleat a message on use.
hm. I'm counting around 1,100 instances of "== true" and "== false".
That's a lot of people to shout at. Is it really worthwhile?
"foo==tr
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 04:27:51AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> like
> 0 == foo
> instead of
> foo == 0
>
> there were _way_ too many false positives of
> the $Expression sort that I didn't add that test.
Makes sense then as it is.
Thanks.
-apw
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send
On Wed, 2013-04-10 at 10:33 +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 08:17:14PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > Comparisons of A to true and false are better written
> > as A and !A.
[]
> In a complex case such as a + b == false will this do the right thing?
Very sensible question.
On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 08:17:14PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> Comparisons of A to true and false are better written
> as A and !A.
>
> Bleat a message on use.
>
> Signed-off-by: Joe Perches
> ---
> scripts/checkpatch.pl | 17 +
> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git
Comparisons of A to true and false are better written
as A and !A.
Bleat a message on use.
Signed-off-by: Joe Perches
---
scripts/checkpatch.pl | 17 +
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
index 3fb6d86..080e7f6 100755
---
12 matches
Mail list logo
