Hi,
On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 12:36:10AM +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
> I'm not attached to the style, just the feature. If you think it's warranted
> I'll change it.
Seconded.
An even nicer way (this solution seems somewhat asymmetric) than
prio_array_t *target = rq->active;
if (batch_task(p))
target = rq->expired;
enqueue_task(p, target);
may be
prio_array_t *target;
if (batch_task(p))
target = rq->expired;
else
target = rq->active;
enqueue_task(p, target);
and thus (but this coding style may be considered overloaded):
prio_array_t *target;
target = batch_task(p) ?
rq->expired : rq->active;
enqueue_task(p, target);
But this discussion is clearly growing out of control now ;)
Andreas Mohr
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
