From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=52944 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Olzuj-0006dR-L9
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 03:51:54 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1Olzui-00007A-FC
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 03:51:53 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:51803)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1Olzui-00006s-8w
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 03:51:52 -0400
Message-ID: <4C6CE292.7090404@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 09:51:46 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 2/5] CODING_STYLE: add C type rules
References: <AANLkTinM4GFK8cUj3gAyUNFT_9yM83MGTbDiwLjvCJi2@mail.gmail.com>	<4C6A43B5.40809@redhat.com>	<4C6AD744.1070009@twiddle.net>	<4C6B9B44.7020803@redhat.com>
	<4C6BB642.4000205@redhat.com> <4C6BE6E1.9010108@redhat.com>
	<4C6C1072.1000200@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <4C6C1072.1000200@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>, Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>

On 08/18/2010 06:55 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> - Do not rely on the fact that bool normalizes logical non-false values
>> to 1. So, write "x = true" instead of "x++" and "x = !x" instead of
>> "x--".
>> - Similarly, when x is a bool, it may be clearer to avoid
>> "x |= y". Instead, use either "x = x || y" (if short circuiting
>> is acceptable or even desirable) or "x |= (y != 0)".
>>
>> Probably a bit too verbose, but you get the idea.
>
> _Bool can have values of 0 or 1, so all of the above should actually work.

Yes, I'd like to rule those out even though they work, because I find 
them confusing.  The compiler is smart enough to generate the same code 
in both cases.

Paolo