Re: [PATCH] coverity: CID35: fixed wrong condition

[Felix Nawothnig]

Marcus Meissner wrote:
> - if(nRelPos>=0) { /* if this or preceding row */
> - if(nRelPos<=0) { /* if this or preceding row */
>   while(nRelPos<=0) {

Shouldn't that become a "do { ... } while()" then?

[PATCH] coverity: CID35: fixed wrong condition

[Marcus Meissner]

On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 10:29:23PM +0100, Felix Nawothnig wrote:
> Marcus Meissner wrote:
> > - if(nRelPos>=0) { /* if this or preceding row */
> > - if(nRelPos<=0) { /* if this or preceding row */
> >  while(nRelPos<=0) {
>
> Shouldn't that become a "do { ... } while()" then?

No, since there is a return item; after the while ()  loop.

Actually we might want to kill the whole function, it seems not to
be used.

I am just not comfortable with removing it.

Ciao, Marcus

[PATCH] coverity: CID35: fixed wrong condition

[Felix Nawothnig]

Marcus Meissner wrote:
> > > - if(nRelPos>=0) { /* if this or preceding row */
> > > - if(nRelPos<=0) { /* if this or preceding row */
> > > while(nRelPos<=0) {
> >
> > Shouldn't that become a "do { ... } while()" then?
>
> No, since there is a return item; after the while ()  loop.

I meant replacing just the while(), not the if() while().

It's mostly a matter of style though as gcc most likely will compile it 
to a do {} while() anyway.

Felix

[PATCH] coverity: CID35: fixed wrong condition

[Marcus Meissner]

On Tue, Feb 06, 2007 at 07:20:40PM +0100, Felix Nawothnig wrote:
> Marcus Meissner wrote:
> > > > - if(nRelPos>=0) { /* if this or preceding row */
> > > > - if(nRelPos<=0) { /* if this or preceding row */
> > > > while(nRelPos<=0) {
> > >
> > > Shouldn't that become a "do { ... } while()" then?
> >
> > No, since there is a return item; after the while ()  loop.
>
> I meant replacing just the while(), not the if() while().
>
> It's mostly a matter of style though as gcc most likely will compile it 
> to a do {} while() anyway.

I only wanted to do the minimalistic change to avoid
errors creeping in ;)

Ciao, Marcus