lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Sep]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateWed, 6 Sep 2000 11:39:59 -0500
FromBill Wendling <>
SubjectRe: linux-2.4.0-test8-pre5
Also sprach Dan Aloni:
} On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Peter Samuelson wrote:
} 
} > Can someone explain this line from the VIA update?
} >   #define FIT(v,min,max) (((v)>(max)?(max):(v))<(min)?(min):(v))
} > Barring side effects on the variables, it is equivalent to
} >   #define FIT(v,min,max) ((v)<(min)?(min):(v))
} > 
} > Why do I get the feeling that this was *not* the intent?
} 
} Correct. The last v should be replaced with whatever that we got from
} (v)>(max)?(max):(v), like:
} 
} #define FIT(v,min,max) (((v)>(max)?(max):(v))<(min)?(min):((v)>(max)?(max):(v)))
} 
} Or perhaps this is a lot better:
} 
} #define FIT(v,min,max) ((v)>(max)?(max):((v)<(min)?(min):(v)))
} 
*pukes*
Wouldn't an inline'd function be much much more readable/maintainable??

-- 
|| Bill Wendling			wendling@ganymede.isdn.uiuc.edu
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:38    [from the cache]
©2003-2008