Alex Henrie <alexhenri...@gmail.com> writes:

> The condition "if (q->nr <= j)" checks whether the loop exited normally
> or via a break statement. This check can be avoided by replacing the
> jump out of the inner loop with a jump to the end of the outer loop.
>
> With the break replaced by a goto, the two diff_q calls then can be
> replaced with a single diff_q call outside of the outer if statement.

I doubt that it is a good idea to do these two things.  Especially I
do not see why the latter makes the resulting code better.

> Signed-off-by: Alex Henrie <alexhenri...@gmail.com>
> ---
>  diffcore-break.c | 14 ++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/diffcore-break.c b/diffcore-break.c
> index 875aefd3fe..ee7519d959 100644
> --- a/diffcore-break.c
> +++ b/diffcore-break.c
> @@ -286,17 +286,15 @@ void diffcore_merge_broken(void)
>                                       /* Peer survived.  Merge them */
>                                       merge_broken(p, pp, &outq);
>                                       q->queue[j] = NULL;
> -                                     break;
> +                                     goto next;
>                               }
>                       }
> -                     if (q->nr <= j)
> -                             /* The peer did not survive, so we keep
> -                              * it in the output.
> -                              */
> -                             diff_q(&outq, p);
> +                     /* The peer did not survive, so we keep
> +                      * it in the output.
> +                      */
>               }
> -             else
> -                     diff_q(&outq, p);
> +             diff_q(&outq, p);
> +next:;
>       }
>       free(q->queue);
>       *q = outq;

Reply via email to