On Tue, 5 Feb 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > On Tue, 5 Feb 2008, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, Daniel Barkalow wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> > if (any_files) {
> >> > - if (o->merge) {
> >> > + if (skip_entry) {
> >> > + do
> >> > + o->pos++;
> >> > + while (o->pos < active_nr &&
> >> > + !strcmp(active_cache[o->pos]->name,
> >> > + src[0]->name));
> >> > + } else if (o->merge) {
> >>
> >> Maybe it is just me, but I would have thought
> >>
> >> while (++o->pos < active_nr)
> >> if (strcmp(active_cache[o->pos]->name,
> >> src[0]->name))
> >> break;
> >>
> >> more readable. But that's maybe because I have trouble with do ... while
> >> constructs logically (I like to see the loop condition first, then the
> >> loop body).
> >
> > I find yours less readable, because the loop condition is an exceptional
> > case (this is the last entry, so we run out of active_cache before finding
> > anything else), and you've got the actual effect of the loop in the
> > condition instead of the body, and I find using the value of ++x or x++ a
> > bit confusing outside of regular idioms. I'd go for:
> >
> > o->pos++;
> > while (o->pos < active_nr &&
> > !strcmp(active_cache[o->pos]->name,
> > src[0]->name))
> > o->pos++;
> >
> > if you care, though; it's not bad to make it clear we're skipping the
> > first of these entries based on a different consideration from the rest
> > (the first is the entry we decided to skip, and the rest are ones that
> > match it in filename).
>
> The last one is vastly more readable than your original, and
> moderately easier to follow than Dscho's, at least to me.
I like this version best, too, and it's what I've got in my revised
series.
-Daniel
*This .sig left intentionally blank*
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
