On 04/09/2016 11:51 AM, Takashi Iwai wrote: > On Sat, 09 Apr 2016 11:16:59 +0200, Daniel Mack wrote: >> On 04/09/2016 10:52 AM, Takashi Iwai wrote: >>> Just for checking count=0 and count=1, we need no loop to count >>> beforehand. >>> if (info->control != control && >>> (list != mixer->id_elems[unit] || >>> list->list_next_id_elem)) >>> continue; >>> >>> But, this doesn't look better and is more harder to understand, so I'm >>> not willing to sell it :) >> >> I had something like that before but opted for the more readable >> version. But you're right. I'll add a comment and do it your way. > > Oh no, sorry, I wasn't clear: I meant that my version is worse in the > end, and I prefer your first version, just for simplicity. Ah ok :) Well, ultimately up to you; you have both versions, and the two patches should apply independently anyway. Or I can resend both if you prefer that. Thanks, Daniel _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
