On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 10:33:51PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> 2017-12-07 20:02 GMT+01:00 Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> > Hello,
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 05:26:50PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> >> > + if (at24->chip.flags & AT24_FLAG_NO_RDROL) {
> >> > + bits = (at24->chip.flags & AT24_FLAG_ADDR16) ? 16 : 8;
> >>
> >> There's no need for braces around the ternary operator's condition.
> >
> > Even if not required, I'd keep them for clearity.
> >
>
> I don't want to start bikeshedding, so I'll take it as it is, but I
> prefer to avoid braces wherever it's not necessary.
For me the reasoning is: Most people (me included) don't know off-hand
if the semantic of
a & b ? c : d
is
(a & b) ? c : d
or
a & (b ? c : d)
In some situations (e.g. a & b == c) gcc even warns when you don't add
syntactically needless parentheses. The case under discussion isn't such
an example though.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
