[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <46AF28CF.6000302@student.ltu.se>
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 14:19:27 +0200
From: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@...dent.ltu.se>
To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>
CC: Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>,
Yoann Padioleau <padator@...adoo.fr>,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, rmk@....linux.org.uk,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/68] 0 -> NULL, for arch/arm
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Jul 27 2007 10:59, Al Viro wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jul 27, 2007 at 11:44:07AM +0200, Yoann Padioleau wrote:
>>
>>> buf = alloc_safe_buffer(device_info, ptr, size, dir);
>>> - if (buf == 0) {
>>> + if (buf == NULL) {
>>>
>> if (!buf)
>> surely...
>>
>
> Makes it look like it's used as a bool.
>
But the conditional checking for a pointer and a boolean is the same; 0
== NULL == 'false' and the rest is valid/'true'. So IMHO it is a cleaner
way to write it. But then again, some people like to abuse the '!' on
"regular" variables.
Richard Knutsson
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists