lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [May]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: page_launder() bug
Date
On Monday 07 May 2001 08:26, Tobias Ringstrom wrote:
> On Sun, 6 May 2001, David S. Miller wrote:
> > It is the most straightforward way to make a '1' or '0'
> > integer from the NULL state of a pointer.
>
> But is it really specified in the C "standards" to be exctly zero or
> one, and not zero and non-zero?

Yes, and if we did not have this stupid situation where the C language
standard is not freely available online then you would not have had to
ask.</rant>

> IMHO, the ?: construct is way more readable and reliable.

There is no difference in reliability. Readability is a matter of
opinion - my opinion is that they are equally readable. To its credit,
gcc produces the same ia32 code in either case:

int foo = 999;
return 1 + !!foo;

<main+6>: movl $0x3e7,0xfffffffc(%ebp)
<main+13>: cmpl $0x0,0xfffffffc(%ebp)
<main+17>: je 0x80483e0 <main+32>
<main+19>: mov $0x2,%eax
<main+24>: jmp 0x80483e5 <main+37>
<main+26>: lea 0x0(%esi),%esi
<main+32>: mov $0x1,%eax
<main+37>: mov %eax,%eax
int foo = 999;
return foo? 2: 1;

<main+6>: movl $0x3e7,0xfffffffc(%ebp)
<main+13>: cmpl $0x0,0xfffffffc(%ebp)
<main+17>: je 0x80483e0 <main+32>
<main+19>: mov $0x2,%eax
<main+24>: jmp 0x80483e5 <main+37>
<main+26>: lea 0x0(%esi),%esi
<main+32>: mov $0x1,%eax
<main+37>: mov %eax,%eax
--
Daniel
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:52    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site