On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 09:32:11PM +0200, Hawa, Hanna wrote: > On 12/20/2022 9:18 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > How you suggest to simplify this? > > Using Elvis operator, which is ?:. > > Are you refer to use 'return dev->pins && dev->pins->p ?: NULL;' ? > Can't use Elvis operator in this way, because it will return the result of > 'dev->pins && dev->pins->p' and not the value of 'dev->pins->p' I see now. Then we need to check pins separately, something like if (!dev->pins) return NULL; return dev->pins->p; Sorry that I haven't noticed that before. > > > I can use 'return dev->pins ? dev->pins->p ?: dev->pins->p : NULL;' > > Have you even try to compile this? > Yup, the code compiled, but i think the first suggestion is more readable. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
