On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 11:36:19PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> Am Thursday 23 March 2006 22:32 schrieb Olof Johansson:
> > > +static inline int hvc_rtas_write_console(uint32_t vtermno, const char
> > > *buf, int count) +{
> > > + int done;
> > > +
> > > + /* if there is more than one character to be displayed, wait a bit */
> > > + for (done = 0; done < count; done++) {
> > > + int result;
> > > + result = rtas_call(rtascons_put_char_token, 1, 1, NULL, buf[done]);
> > > + if (result)
> > > + break;
> >
> > Why introduce a scope-local variable just to check it?
> > if(rtas_call(...)) would be cleaner.
>
> I don't like doing the important stuff inside of another expression,
> and I prefer conditions not to have side-effects.
> If nobody else has a strong opinion on it, I'd prefer to leave it.
Ok. It just looked silly to have the declaration/assignment/test and no
use of result outside of those three lines.
> BTW, who is the current maintainer of hvc_console? Ryan is working on
> glibc nowadays, right?
That's what I think IBM pays him to do, that's never stopped people from
maintaining other code in the past though. :-)
-Olof
-
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]