On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 08:50:40AM -0700, Alex Wang wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH] This patch implements "ofp_is_less_than()" and use it
> to replace the PORT_COMPARE() function for port comparison.
> Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 09:05:50 -0700
> Message-Id: <1370880350-22000-1-git-send-email-al...@nicira.com>
> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.7.9.5
>
> This patch implements "ofp_is_less_than()" and use it to replace the
> PORT_COMPARE() function for port comparison.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alex Wang <al...@nicira.com>
I'm not a fan of this approach. It's hard to put my finger on exactly
why, but some factors that I don't like are:
* For me, anyway, it's hard to think through the ordering and
(sometimes) negation to figure out whether the condition is
correct.
* The form is different from a normal comparison, which makes
it a little harder to read.
* It's pretty long.
I actually find the PORT_COMPARE form easier to read, although it
definitely has downsides of its own.
Here's another form that I find a little easier to read (which might
only be because I've used it fairly often before):
static inline int
ofp_compare_3way(ofp_port_t a_, ofp_port_t b_)
{
uint32_t a = (OVS_FORCE uint32_t) a_;
uint32_t b = (OVS_FORCE uint32_t) b_;
return a < b ? -1 : a > b;
}
Then you can write any condition you like by comparing against 0. For
example:
if (ofp_compare_3way(ofp_port, OFPP_MAX) >= 0)
is equivalent to:
if (ofp_port >= OFPP_MAX)
and
if (ofp_compare_3way(ofp_port, OFPP_MAX) < 0)
is equivalent to:
if (ofp_port < OFPP_MAX)
But I think I still like the way I proposed earlier better.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
