Frédéric Delanoy frederic.delanoy@gmail.com writes:
@@ -374,7 +374,7 @@ void WCMD_HandleTildaModifiers(WCHAR **start, const WCHAR *forVariable, points to the variable just after the modifiers. Process modifiers in a specific order, remembering there could be duplicates */ modifierLen = lastModifier - firstModifier;
- finaloutput[0] = 0x00;
- finaloutput[0] = '\0';
It's mostly a matter of taste, but I don't think '\0' is better than 0x00, it's just another complicated way of writing 0.
2011/9/13 Alexandre Julliard julliard@winehq.org:
Frédéric Delanoy frederic.delanoy@gmail.com writes:
@@ -374,7 +374,7 @@ void WCMD_HandleTildaModifiers(WCHAR **start, const WCHAR *forVariable, points to the variable just after the modifiers. Process modifiers in a specific order, remembering there could be duplicates */ modifierLen = lastModifier - firstModifier;
- finaloutput[0] = 0x00;
- finaloutput[0] = '\0';
It's mostly a matter of taste, but I don't think '\0' is better than 0x00, it's just another complicated way of writing 0.
Well IMHO '\0' clearly indicates a char value, while 0 could be an integer (not in this obvioius example of course). This way you've a visual indicator/differentiator with nearby integer values assignments like "foo_integer_var = 0", and this could make the code more readable IMO
Frédéric Delanoy frederic.delanoy@gmail.com writes:
Well IMHO '\0' clearly indicates a char value, while 0 could be an integer (not in this obvioius example of course). This way you've a visual indicator/differentiator with nearby integer values assignments like "foo_integer_var = 0", and this could make the code more readable IMO
They both mean the same thing, and I don't think the extra line noise makes it more readable. But like I said, it's a matter of taste, and you can use the way you prefer in your own code; the corollary is that you can't change it in other people's code.
-
Alexandre Julliard -
Frédéric Delanoy