Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 07 Aug 2003 00:00:23 -0400 | From | Rahul Karnik <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH][TRIVIAL] Bugzilla bug # 322 - double logical operator drivers/char/sx.c |
| |
Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote: > On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 21:26:30 EDT, Jeff Sipek said: > > >>>Can you really DO (x < y > z) and have it work as an anded pair of >>>comparisons? Maybe this is an addition to C that I am not aware of. >>> >>>I would expect (x < y > z) to be equivalent to ((x < y) > z). >> >>Ah, very true. I wonder what the author intended. Also, since the 'z' is 0 in >>all the cases, the statement "(i < TIMEOUT) > 0" can be reduced to "i < >>TIMEOUT". > > > Of course, if the author intended (x<y) && (x > 0), you can't reduce it if > x is at all possibly negative....
Doesn't matter; x is a loop index incrementing from 0 in this case.
Actually (correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't:
for(int i = 0; i < TIMEOUT > 0; i++)
translate to:
for(int i = 1; i < TIMEOUT; i++)
rather than:
for(int i = 0; i < TIMEOUT; i++)?
I hav not looked at the actual context of the code, but at least mathematically that makes more sense to me. i should never be 0 in the body of the loop, methinks?
Thanks, Rahul -- Rahul Karnik rahul@genebrew.com
- 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/
| |