Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Sat, Mar 01, 2008 at 11:35:11PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> That is, "for objects we have, make sure it uniquely identifies,
>> otherwise, make sure the phoney name is long enough such that it would not
>> name any existing object".
>
> I think your logic is correct, and I think naming it 'exists' is more
> readable (I don't have a tendency not to double-negate).
>
> But...
>
>> - if (!status ||
>> - (is_null && status != SHORT_NAME_AMBIGUOUS)) {
>> + if (exists
>> + ? !status
>> + : status == SHORT_NAME_NOT_FOUND) {
>> hex[len] = 0;
>> return hex;
>> }
>
> Maybe it is just me, but I find the ternary operator here reduces
> readability. I would have liked the more verbose:
>
> if ((exists && !status) ||
> (!exists && status == SHORT_NAME_NOT_FOUND)) {
>
> But now I am just painting your bikeshed.
Heh, the ternary is a mini "if-then-else" by itself. Turn your head
sideways (just like you do when you meet a smiley) and the parse tree will
jump at you ;-).
--
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
