On Sat, Nov 6, 2021 at 8:15 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 11/4/21 19:14, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 04, 2021 at 03:49:48PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> >> On 11/2/21 00:43, Daniel Scally wrote:
...
> >> dmi_first_match(++match);
> >
> > Not sure I understood the purpose of the call.
>
> You are right , that should have a "match = " in front of it, but
> I actually like this form found else where better:
>
> for (match = dmi_first_match(int3472_tps68470_board_data_table);
> match;
> match = dmi_first_match(match + 1)) {
>
> That IMHO makes the whole code a lot clearer, so I'll switch to that for
> the next version, thank you for catching this.
I'm very glad that you read my mind!
I was too modest to express the same proposal as you do just above. Go for it!
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
