Re: [PATCH 13/25] Unionfs: add un/likely conditionals on dir ops

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Erez Zadok
Date: Thursday, September 27, 2007 - 7:28 am

In message <46FAD1D2.8030306@tiscali.nl>, roel writes:

I don't know.  Anyone?  Will un/likely "break" in the above form?

Actually, it looks like assignments within conditionals are just prohibited
(even if you use double parentheses to shut gcc up :-).  It's not mentioned
in the CodingStyle, but it is in scripts/checkpatch.pl.  So I'll have to
take out all those assignments out of the conditionals anyway.  Good.  It
makes code more readable (and besides, most modern compilers will optimize
it just the same).

Cheers,
Erez.
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[GIT PULL -mm] 00/25 Unionfs updates/cleanups/fixes, Erez Zadok, (Tue Sep 25, 8:09 pm)
[PATCH 01/25] Unionfs: Simplify unionfs_get_nlinks, Erez Zadok, (Tue Sep 25, 8:09 pm)
[PATCH 02/25] Unionfs: Remove unused #defines, Erez Zadok, (Tue Sep 25, 8:09 pm)
[PATCH 04/25] Unionfs: cache-coherency fixes, Erez Zadok, (Tue Sep 25, 8:09 pm)
[PATCH 06/25] Unionfs: minor coding style updates, Erez Zadok, (Tue Sep 25, 8:09 pm)
Re: [PATCH 13/25] Unionfs: add un/likely conditionals on d ..., Erez Zadok, (Thu Sep 27, 7:28 am)