Re: [PATCH] only use 48-bit lba when necessary

From: Chuck Ebbert (76306.1226@compuserve.com)
Date: Fri Apr 04 2003 - 12:02:00 EST

Next message: Steve Dickson: "[NFS] [PATCH] Corrects error patch in nfs_instantiate()"
Previous message: Jörn Engel: "Re: [PATCH] reduce stack in cpqarray.c::ida_ioctl()"
Maybe in reply to: Jens Axboe: "[PATCH] only use 48-bit lba when necessary"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Juan Quintela wrote:

>Reason is that:
>
>if (expr)
> var = true;
>else
> var = false;
>
>is always a bad construct.
>
>var = expr;
>
>is a better construct to express that meaning.

Yes, but:

   if (expr1 && expr2)
      var = true;
   else
      var = false;

is usually better turned into something that avoids jumps
when it's safe to evaluate both parts unconditionally:

var = (expr1 != 0) & (expr2 != 0);

or (if you can stand it):

var = !!expr1 & !!expr2;

--
 Chuck
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Steve Dickson: "[NFS] [PATCH] Corrects error patch in nfs_instantiate()"
Previous message: Jörn Engel: "Re: [PATCH] reduce stack in cpqarray.c::ida_ioctl()"
Maybe in reply to: Jens Axboe: "[PATCH] only use 48-bit lba when necessary"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Apr 07 2003 - 22:00:23 EST