Martin von Zweigbergk <martinv...@gmail.com> writes: > I was recently confused by the yoda condition in this block of code from [1] > > + for (i = 0; i < revs.nr; i++) > + if (&bases->item->object == &revs.commit[i]->object) > + break; /* found */ > + if (revs.nr <= i) > > I think I was particularly surprised because it came so soon after the > "i < revs.nr". I didn't bother commenting because it seemed too > subjective and the code base has tons of these.
That follows "visual/textual order should follow the actual ordering" principle. Think of a number-line you learn in elementary school arithmetic class, and try to place revs.nr and i on it. I agree that there is no justification to write "if 0 == something", when "if something == 0" suffices. The latter reads better and that is why the phrase "yoda condition" was invented. But the situation is different when both sides are not constants, and especially when "<" and "<=" are involved.. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
