Tom Rix <t...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 1/6/21 11:44 AM, David Howells wrote: > > Tom Rix <t...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > >> These two loops iterate over the same data, i believe returning here is all > >> that is needed. > > But if the first loop is made to support a new type, but the second loop is > > missed, it will then likely oops. Besides, the compiler should optimise > > both > > paths together. > > You are right, I was only considering the existing cases.
Thanks. Can I put that down as a Reviewed-by? David
