[try4 3/3] gdi32: added PATH_PolyDraw

[Misha Koshelev]

> +            else if((types[i] & ~PT_CLOSEFIGURE) == PT_LINETO){
> +                PATH_LineTo(dc, pts[i].x, pts[i].y);
> +            }
> +                if(!((i + 2 < cbPoints) && (types[i + 1] == PT_BEZIERTO)
> +                    && ((types[i + 2] & ~PT_CLOSEFIGURE) == PT_BEZIERTO))){
> +                    goto err;
> +                }
> +            else{
> +                goto err;
> +            }

On a more stylistic note, any reason for all these single line if statements that
have their contents enclosed in {}'s? (i.e., instead of:

if (a) {
   call_b();
}

why not just:

if (a)
   call_b();

If anything, this adds one unnecessary line with the single } after the statement itself, and
seems unnecessary to me.

Misha

[Andrew Talbot]

Misha Koshelev wrote:
> On a more stylistic note, any reason for all these single line if
> statements that have their contents enclosed in {}'s? (i.e., instead of:
>
> if (a) {
>    call_b();
> }
>
> why not just:
>
> if (a)
>    call_b();
>
> If anything, this adds one unnecessary line with the single } after the
> statement itself, and seems unnecessary to me.
>
> Misha

If either part of an if-else statement is compound, then fully-bracketed
syntax (as it is known) is considered good style by some (for example, see
the Indian Hill Style and Coding Standard): it may make problem detection
easier.

-- 
Andy.