On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 11:59:51AM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> 2015-02-24 21:51 GMT+01:00 Guenter Roeck :
> > I think the lm85 conversion actually introduces a bug with such an
> > off-by-one mistake. And if it doesn't, there is still a unexplained
> > and not easy to understand '-1' in
2015-02-24 21:51 GMT+01:00 Guenter Roeck :
> I think the lm85 conversion actually introduces a bug with such an
> off-by-one mistake. And if it doesn't, there is still a unexplained
> and not easy to understand '-1' in one of the calls to find_closest().
>
> So the question is if the new code
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 11:59:51AM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
2015-02-24 21:51 GMT+01:00 Guenter Roeck li...@roeck-us.net:
I think the lm85 conversion actually introduces a bug with such an
off-by-one mistake. And if it doesn't, there is still a unexplained
and not easy to understand
2015-02-24 21:51 GMT+01:00 Guenter Roeck li...@roeck-us.net:
I think the lm85 conversion actually introduces a bug with such an
off-by-one mistake. And if it doesn't, there is still a unexplained
and not easy to understand '-1' in one of the calls to find_closest().
So the question is if the
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 12:33:06PM -0800, Phil Pokorny wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Bartosz Golaszewski
> wrote:
> >
> > Searching for the member of an array closest to 'x' is
> > duplicated in several places.
> >
> > Add two macros that implement this algorithm for arrays
> > sorted
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Bartosz Golaszewski
wrote:
>
> Searching for the member of an array closest to 'x' is
> duplicated in several places.
>
> Add two macros that implement this algorithm for arrays
> sorted both in ascending and descending order.
I don't see the point here. You're
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 12:33:06PM -0800, Phil Pokorny wrote:
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Bartosz Golaszewski
bgolaszew...@baylibre.com wrote:
Searching for the member of an array closest to 'x' is
duplicated in several places.
Add two macros that implement this algorithm for
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Bartosz Golaszewski
bgolaszew...@baylibre.com wrote:
Searching for the member of an array closest to 'x' is
duplicated in several places.
Add two macros that implement this algorithm for arrays
sorted both in ascending and descending order.
I don't see the
8 matches
Mail list logo