On Friday, June 01, 2012 12:39:48 pm Eitan Adler wrote:
> On 1 June 2012 07:24, John Baldwin <j...@freebsd.org> wrote:
> > This is why I personally loathe assignment side effects in boolean
> > expressions
> > for control flow. I tend to write this sort of thing instead as:
> >
> > channel->dtr_arr[dtr_index].dtr = dtrh;
> > if (dtrh != NULL) {
>
> Same here. I was told to use the assignment is style(9) by multiple
> people though. If it really is, I wish it would change.
style(9) doesn't make a clear statement either way, but it has contradicting
examples.
First:
while ((ch = getopt(argc, argv, "abNn:")) != -1)
(and this one I use all the time myself as that is the common idiom for
getopt())
Second:
error = function(a1, a2);
if (error != 0)
exit(error);
Also, style(9) tends to frown on assignments that are side-effects in other
places, for example:
Be careful to not obfuscate the code by initializing variables in the
declarations. Use this feature only thoughtfully. DO NOT use function
calls in initializers.
struct foo one, *two;
double three;
int *four, five;
char *six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, twelve;
four = myfunction();
Some newer changes added at the end do use assignment side-effects while
demonstrating other rules (the !p example and err(3) and warn(3) examples,
this last I find particularly obfuscated and painful to read).
Note that I do not consider this to be an assignment side effect:
if (ioctl(...) < 0)
err(1, "ioctl");
That is, I don't write that out as:
i = ioctl(...);
if (i < 0)
However, I do split it out if the return value is used for more than error
checking, e.g.:
fd = open(...);
if (fd < 0)
err(1, "open");
--
John Baldwin
_______________________________________________
svn-src-all@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
