Am Freitag, 5. August 2016, 09:08:59 CEST schrieb Mat Martineau: Hi Mat, > > > > When trying to implement it, I think that it would even be more confusing, > > because we need a conditional in any case. Do you like > > > > return __keyctl_dh_compute(params, buffer, buflen, (kdf) ? &kdfcopy : > > NULL); > > > > better than the already presented code? Besides, this would now imply that > > we have two conditionals instead of one. > > Another approach that uses one conditional is to add a struct > keyctl_kdf_params* variable and assign it in the conditional block. Maybe > that's not much of a win, it's up to you. To be honest, I like the code as is, because although you have two invocations, it is yet just a few lines in size and thus readable and second either my suggestion or yours with the additional variable implies one or more additional instructions (yes, I know, this should not matter too much, but still ... ). Ciao Stephan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
