Peter Memishian wrote:
> > It ("C Style and Coding Standards for SunOS") says in section 19:
> >
> > Do not default the boolean test for nonzero, i.e.
> > if (f() != FAIL)
> > is better than
> > if (f())
> >
> > then:
> >
> > Never use the boolean negation operator (!) with non-boolean
> > expressions. In particular, never use it to test for a NULL
> > pointer or to test for success of the strcmp function, e.g.,
> >
> > char *p;
> > ...
> > if (!p) /* WRONG */
> > return;
> > if (!strcmp(*argv, "-a")) /* WRONG */
> > aflag++;
> >
> > I'm guessing that's what Garrett was thinking of.
>
> I don't think that applies to testing flag values. I see a significant
> difference between "if (foo())" and "if (foo->bar & MYFLAG)".
>
I'm not sure if the Style Guide makes that difference. I don't know.
Frankly, this is one of my least favorite rules in the guide, because I
happen to think "if (!foo)" is clearer than "if (foo != 0)". But I
didn't write the guide, or get to vote on it -- but I do assume that I'm
bound to follow it.
If I've misinterpreted what it says, I'd be happy to be corrected,
because to *my* eyes, I agree with Peter.
-- Garrett
_______________________________________________
driver-discuss mailing list
driver-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/driver-discuss
