Re: [PATCH 1b/7] dlm: core locking

Daniel Phillips
2005-04-26T01:34:41Z

On Monday 25 April 2005 18:27, Nikita Danilov wrote:
> > > > +
> > > > +static int is_remote(struct dlm_rsb *r)
> > > > +{
> > > > + DLM_ASSERT(r->res_nodeid >= 0, dlm_print_rsb(r););
> > > > + return r->res_nodeid ? TRUE : FALSE;
> > > > +}
> > >
> > > This can be simply
> > >
> > > return r->res_nodeid;
> >
> > Not quite the same. Perhaps you meant:
> >
> > return !!r->res_nodeid;
>
> Strictly speaking yes (assuming TRUE is defined as 1), but name
> is_remote() implies usages like
>
> if (is_remote(r)) {
> do_something();
> }
>
> in such contexts !! is not necessary.

Any objection to making it inline and let the compiler delete the redundant
code? The princple is: it's better to spell out "!!" when that's intended,
rather than build in a nasty surprise for later. The inline code will be
smaller than a function call anyway.

Regards,

Daniel