On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 9:55 AM Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Feb 2022, Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 07:14:49PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> >> On Tue, 15 Feb 2022, Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > It's hard to parse for-loop which has some magic calculations inside.
> >> > Much cleaner to use while-loop directly.
> >>
> >> I assume you're trying to prove a point following our recent
> >> for-vs-while loop discussion. I really can't think of any other reason
> >> you'd end up looking at this file or this loop.
> >>
> >> With the change, the loop indeed becomes simpler, but it also runs one
> >> iteration further than the original. Whoops.
> >
> > Yeah, sorry for that, the initial condition should be d = depth - 1,
> > of course.
>
> Well, no, the condition should be while (--i) instead to also match the
> values the original loop takes. ;D
"There are two hard things in computer science: cache invalidation,
naming things, and off-by-one errors."
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
