Hi Thomas,
On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 11:48:41AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> I'm not sure if this is an improvement over the previous patch.
> If so it should be squashed into it.
Indeed, I find it less readable, because when you read:
result(llen, ret ? FAIL : OK);
it makes it explicit what values of ret are expected with what meaning,
but this one:
result(llen, ret);
makes it quite opaque. I'd rather keep the ternary operator and the 3
values that are likely more accessible to newcomers who will more quickly
figure how to do what they need.
Thus I dropped this one and applied the 3 other ones which are indeed
a nice cleanup.
Thanks,
Willy
