From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "David S. Miller" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15094.25285.410379.109719@pizda.ninka.net> Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 01:54:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: page_launder() bug In-Reply-To: References: <15094.10942.592911.70443@pizda.ninka.net> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Tobias Ringstrom Cc: Jonathan Morton , BERECZ Szabolcs , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: Tobias Ringstrom writes: > But is it really specified in the C "standards" to be exctly zero or one, > and not zero and non-zero? I'm pretty sure it does. > IMHO, the ?: construct is way more readable and reliable. Well identical code has been there for several months just a few lines away. I've seen this idiom used in many places (even the GCC sources :-), so I'm rather surprised people are seeing it for the first time. Later, David S. Miller davem@redhat.com -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux.eu.org/Linux-MM/