On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Kieran Bingham
<kieran.bing...@ideasonboard.com> wrote:
> My only distaste there is having to then add the [i-1] index to the sg_tables.
>
> I have just experimented with:
>
> fail:
> for (; i-- != 0;) {
> struct sg_table *sgt = &rstate->sg_tables[i];
> ...
> }
>
> This performs the correct loops, with the correct indexes, but does the
> decrement in the condition offend coding styles ?
>
> If that's disliked even more I'll just apply your suggestion.
You can still use "i-- > 0", which looks a little bit better IMHO.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- ge...@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
