Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu said:
> On Mon, 10 Feb 2003 14:01:13 +0100, Horst von Brand said:
> > Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> said:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > > - for (i = 0; i < clone_list[i].vendor_id != 0; i++)
> >
> > i < clone_list[i].vendor_id != 0 is (i < clone_list[i].vendor_id) != 0 is
> > just i < clone_list[i].vendor_id, so the for is done for i = 0 and possibly
> > for 1. Getting this effect (if desired) with an if is a load clearer.
>
> However, looking at the definition of clone_list[], it's pretty obvious
> that this was intended:
>
> for (i=0; clone_list[i].vendor_id != 0; i++) {...
>
> It's searching through a zero-terminated table of vendor_id's.
It isn't, as written. Something is very wrong in any case, as it should
have blown up somewhere before.
In any case, the != 0 is redundant, idiomatic C is to just go:
for (i=0; clone_list[i].vendor_id; i++) {...
-- Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616 counter.li.org Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239 Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513 - 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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Feb 15 2003 - 22:00:32 EST