![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
jdow wrote: > From: "James Purser" <purserj@ksit.dynalias.com> > while (deflate(&stream, 0) == Z_OK) - /* nothing */ + /* nothing */; stream.next_in = buf; > You guys REALLY do not see the changed semantics here? You are > changing: > while (deflate(&stream, 0) == Z_OK) > stream.next_in = buf; > > into > > while (deflate(&stream, 0) == Z_OK) > ; > /* Then the data itself.. */ > stream.next_in = buf; > > I suspect the results of that tiny bit of code would be slightly > different, especially if "stream.next_in" is volatile, "buf" > is volatile, or if the assignment to next_in has an effect on > the "deflate" operation. As I already said, deflate() in this case does only ONE iteration. stream.avail_in is NOT changed in the loop (except of the deflate() itself, where it will be set to 0 - provided out buffer have enouth room). So the whole while loop does only ONE iteration, returning Z_NEED_DATA or something the next one. So no, the semantics here (actual semantics) does NOT change. /mjt - 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: 2005-05-08 13:45 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||