On Fri, Jul 05, 2019 at 08:30:08PM +0200, Markus Elfring wrote: > From: Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2019 20:22:26 +0200 > > Avoid an extra function call by using a ternary operator instead of > a conditional statement. Which is a good thing, because...? > This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software. Oh, I see - that answers all questions. "Software has detected an issue", so of course an issue it is. > - if (irq < asic->irq_base + ASIC3_NUM_GPIOS) > - irq_set_chip(irq, &asic3_gpio_irq_chip); > - else > - irq_set_chip(irq, &asic3_irq_chip); > - > + irq_set_chip(irq, > + (irq < asic->irq_base + ASIC3_NUM_GPIOS) > + ? &asic3_gpio_irq_chip > + : &asic3_irq_chip); ... except that the result is not objectively better by any real criteria. It's not more readable, it conveys _less_ information to reader (the fact that calls differ only by the last argument had been visually obvious already, and logics used to be easier to see), it (obviously) does not generate better (or different) code. What the hell is the point? May I politely inquire what makes you so determined to avoid any not-entirely-mechanical activity?
