John Beck wrote:
> Garrett> Actually, I think a few other places I also used != 0. Although
> Garrett> compilers evaluate it the same way, I prefer to make comparison
> Garrett> against zero explicit. I thought at one point I'd even seen a
> Garrett> style guide recommending or requiring this.
>
> Peter> Really? I don't recall anything about that.
>
> 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())
>
I think the above is what I was talking about.
-- Garrett
> 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.
>
> -- John
>
> http://blogs.sun.com/jbeck
>
_______________________________________________
networking-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
