On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 1:20 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > * Julia Lawall <julia@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > There are some legitimate uses of !x & y which are actually of the > > form !x & !y, where x and y are function calls. That is a not > > particularly elegant way of getting both x and y to be evaluated and > > then combining the results using "and". If such code is considered > > acceptable, then perhaps the sparse patch should be more complicated. > > i tend to be of the opinion that the details in C source code should be > visually obvious and should be heavily simplified down from what is > 'possible' language-wise - with most deviations and complications that > depart from convention considered an error. I'd consider "!fn1() & > !fn2()" a borderline coding style violation in any case - and it costs > nothing to change it to "!fn1() && !fn2()". If someone writes (!x & !y) instead of (!x && !y) because both x and y have to be evaluated, this means that both x and y have side effects. Please keep in mind that the C language does not specify whether x or y has to be evaluated first, so if x and y have to be evaluated in that order, an expression like (!x & !y) can be the cause of very subtle bugs. I prefer readability above brevity. Bart Van Assche. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
