James> And the solution is to treat it as a boolean instead?! I'm
James> not sure which is more ugly.
James> Why wouldn't explicit comparison against NULL be the
James> preferred fix?
"if (ptr)" and "if (!ptr)" are the preferred idiom for testing whether
a pointer is NULL. What is gained by writing "if (ptr != NULL)" ?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
