Nemina Amarasinghe <nemi...@gmail.com> writes: >> > ((!remote_is_branch && origin) || (!remote_is_branch || !origin)) >> >> Is it? >> >> The above is the same as (!remote_is_branch || !origin). What you wrote >> before is the same as (!remote_is_branch). >> >> Maybe you should try copy&paste from the expressions you are trying to >> combine to make sure that what you start with makes sense. >> > OMG.. Really sorry for that... that was a silly mistake. > This is the one.. > > ((!remote_is_branch && origin) || (!remote_is_branch && !origin))
That is, indeed, perfectly equivalent to (!remote_is_branch). If you write (!remote_is_branch && (origin || !origin)) then you will have people (and possibly also the compiler) loudly wondering about what you are trying to say here. The suspicion would be that either this is a result of a typo or is supposed to be an annoyingly obtuse replacement for a /* TODO: treat origin and !origin differently */ kind of comment. -- David Kastrup -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
