Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]> writes:
>>Regardless this isn't a case where the C precedence is wrong.
>>"a < b | 1" is an example of C getting the precedence wrong.
>
> Blame the creator of C.
> But maybe this was intended, since | is a logical operation, as is <,
> while + is an arithmetic one. Programmatically probably not making much
> sense, bitfield |= a < b is one use case.
I do. As I recall the history | and & predate the introduction
of || and && and originally served both functions, so the got
the lower precedence.
>>Having to remember where C is wrong and in what circumstances is
>>harder than just putting in parenthesis.
>
> The GNU C compiler will warn you where such may happen, but
> currently does so - too bad - only with && and ||.
> c.c:2: warning: suggest parentheses around && within ||
You see my point :) I have better things to worry about
when writing and reviewing code than remember what the
precedence rules are.
Anyway I have figured out how to remove the need for the - 1,
and the trailing empty entries in proc, patch to follow shortly.
Eric
-
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]
