Re: shell32: Add a navigation pane to the ExplorerBrowser control.

[Juan Lang]

Hi David, I know this was committed already, but something caught my
eye that I didn't understand:

+    if(This->navpane.show ^ show_navpane)

Is this a cute way to write if(This->navpane.show && show_navpane) ?
If so, why ^ rather than &&?

Thanks,
--Juan

shell32: Add a navigation pane to the ExplorerBrowser control.

[Octavian Voicu]

On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 8:11 PM, Juan Lang <juan.lang(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi David, I know this was committed already, but something caught my
> eye that I didn't understand:
>
> +    if(This->navpane.show ^ show_navpane)
>
> Is this a cute way to write if(This->navpane.show && show_navpane) ?
> If so, why ^ rather than &&?

^ is bitwise-XOR, so it is more like if(This->navpane.show != show_navpane),
which looks to be what he intended.

Octavian

shell32: Add a navigation pane to the ExplorerBrowser control.

[David Hedberg]

On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 19:32, Octavian Voicu <octavian.voicu(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 8:11 PM, Juan Lang <juan.lang(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi David, I know this was committed already, but something caught my
> > eye that I didn't understand:
> >
> > +    if(This->navpane.show ^ show_navpane)
> >
> > Is this a cute way to write if(This->navpane.show && show_navpane) ?
> > If so, why ^ rather than &&?
>
> ^ is bitwise-XOR, so it is more like if(This->navpane.show != show_navpane),
> which looks to be what he intended.
>
> Octavian

It's indeed supposed to be !=, which also seems like the easier and
better way of expressing it. :-) I guess the only reason I used ^ is
that that was what came to my mind when I wrote the code in question.
It shouldn't matter in practice, but I can include a patch for it in
my next batch of patches.

shell32: Add a navigation pane to the ExplorerBrowser control.

[Juan Lang]

> ^ is bitwise-XOR, so it is more like if(This->navpane.show != show_navpane),
> which looks to be what he intended.

Ah, yes 'tis.  Perhaps it's a deficiency of my brain, but when reading
bit-twiddling code, I remember the bitwise operators, but when reading
logical code, I tend to stick to the boolean operators more.  David,
AJ will probably override me and say it's not necessary, but to my
eyes != looks clearer.

Thanks,
--Juan