>-----Original Message-----
>From: Alexander Viro [mailto:viro@math.psu.edu]
[snip]
>
>No arguments here, but proposed fixes were remarkably ugly. Example:
>
>tmp = *p++;
>*q = f(tmp, *p++);
>return p;
>
>is equivalent to more idiomatic
>
>*q = f(p[0], p[1]);
>return p+2;
>
>And example with copying the string up to the comma... Yuck. Legal C !=
>decent C.
Strongly agree. If the changes were an elegant solution to the ambiguities
I never would have cared. In fact the whole reason I bothered to read the
patch in the first place was that I feel strongly that something like that
_was_ needed, but the solutions really seemed inferior to the original code
in terms of elegance of expression. (Well some of the original code was
pretty ugly too :-)
--Jonathan--
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 23 2000 - 21:00:10 EST