linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: pi433: remove unnecessary parentheses

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20180110094923.C78122CE00CD@dd39320.kasserver.com>
Date:   Wed, 10 Jan 2018 10:49:23 +0100 (CET)
From:   marcus.wolf@...rthome-wolf.de
To:     gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, joe@...ches.com
Cc:     Valentin.Vidic@...Net.hr, davem@...emloft.net,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        marcin.s.ciupak@...il.com, linux@...f-entwicklungen.de,
        simon@...anor.nu
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: pi433: remove unnecessary parentheses

Joe Perches schrieb am 10.01.2018 10:05:
> On Wed, 2018-01-10 at 09:44 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 11:42:16AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > if (a == b && c == d)
> > > is pretty trivial.
> >
> > But again, don't do that.
> 
> <shrug> We disagree. Life goes on.
> 
> cheers, Joe
>
>

For me the line above isn't obvious and easy to read. If I would be in doubt, whether it really performs correctly, I would have to ask the c-guide, to be absolutely shure.
But to be honest: If I need to find a bug arround taht lines, I wouldn't ask the c-guide, but simply add some (). Then it would be 100% clear and no one would be in doubt any more.

What's the disadvantage of () to emphasise waht is going on. An other Option for me would be, to spend a command line and write that info in form of a comment.

Just my opinion and the way, I would go on if I am in doubt and need to find a bug.

Cheers,

Marcus