lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Sep]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
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    [W:0.047 / U:3.120 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site