On 17/07/2020 13:29, Arne Schwabe wrote:
> The return false/return true is the result of
> running uncrustify.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arne Schwabe <a...@rfc2549.org>
> ---
> src/openvpn/multi.c | 24 +++++++++---------------
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/openvpn/multi.c b/src/openvpn/multi.c
> index 97b7df16..1fdf6ce5 100644
> --- a/src/openvpn/multi.c
> +++ b/src/openvpn/multi.c
> @@ -2229,22 +2229,16 @@ static inline bool
> cc_check_return(int *cc_succeeded_count,
> enum client_connect_return ret)
> {
> - if (ret == CC_RET_SUCCEEDED)
> + switch (ret)
> {
> - (*cc_succeeded_count)++;
> - return true;
> - }
> - else if (ret == CC_RET_FAILED)
> - {
> - return false;
> - }
> - else if (ret == CC_RET_SKIPPED)
> - {
> - return true;
> - }
> - else
> - {
> - ASSERT(0);
> + case CC_RET_SUCCEEDED: (*cc_succeeded_count)++;
> + return true;
> +
> + case CC_RET_FAILED: return false;
> +
> + case CC_RET_SKIPPED: return true;
> +
> + default: ASSERT(0);Code style police .... Even though it is not clearly defined, but based on the example here <https://community.openvpn.net/openvpn/wiki/CodeStyle#Casesinaswitchstatementshouldbreakorexplicitlyfallthrough> ... ... it should be more like: switch (ret) { case CC_RET_SUCCEEDED: (*cc_succeeded_count)++; return true; case CC_RET_FAILED: return false; case CC_RET_SKIPPED: return true; default: ASSERT(0); } I generally find this approach more readable. -- kind regards, David Sommerseth OpenVPN Inc
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Openvpn-devel mailing list Openvpn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openvpn-devel
