Am 20.11.2014 14:18, schrieb Love Nystrom:
Well... Actually not exactly the same.. ;)
"if (f != FALSE)" requires an explicit comparison with a second operand,
No, it does not. It requries the compiler to generate code that executes
the following statement, when f is not 0. It could even use cra
Wow.. (still) a touchy subject, by the number of reactions (no pun
intended).
On 2014-11-14 22.45, Sylvain Petreolle wrote:
We already submit fixes to Wine.
Since Wine is upstream, patches are sent to Wine first.
Ah.. So it's already done. Bless your heart :)
I didn't 'reject' your patch bl
Most modern compilers are wise enough to realize you are comparing with
zero and just do what you said.
___
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev@reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
On 2014-11-16 05.22, Timo Kreuzer wrote:
Am 14.11.2014 15:32, schrieb Love Nystrom:
On 2014-11-14 00.41, Alex Ionescu wrote:
I would much rather see if (f != FALSE) instead of if ( f ).
Well, it's certainly a valid option, and C++ compilers seem to generate
[abbrev]
"if (f != FALSE)" and "if
If you find an engineer in for example india or china I would be interested in
contributing to such a cause if you Timo and Alex could guide and mentor him.
There are probably more people interested in such a project I guess.
/Jan
Jan Blomqvist K
