In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "M. Warner Losh" writes : >: Well, that's my question. David's comment implies that it is not >: good to do '!strcmp()', and I was wondering why it is not good... > > if (strcmp()) > >is the problem with > > if (!strcmp()) > >Which one is right? The first one should mean "are the same" but >really means "are different" and likewise for the second one.
Guys, strcmp() has been defined that way for almost 30 years, get used to it, and don't demand obfuscation of every other if() in the kernel to try to hide the fact... -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
