8 Nov
2017
8 Nov
'17
9:36 p.m.
On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Larry McVoy <lm(a)mcvoy.com> wrote:
On Wed, Nov 08, 2017 at 06:14:20PM +0000, Ralph
Corderoy wrote:
It's also wrong. You couldn't flip it around to write
if (((w & MASK) == TRUE) == TRUE)
because that only works when MASK == 1. So it's dangerous since you can't
apply the normal laws of algebra on it because you are comparing BOOLEANS
and MASKS, which has always ended in pain...
Warner
is better then why stop there? Why not
if (((w & MASK) != FALSE) == TRUE)
Thanks for this, that's the perfect come back to the pedantic folks.