On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 4:51 PM, Jason Molenda via lldb-commits <lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Is this really simpler? We could write it > > if (name == g_zero) > return 0; > else > return UINT32_MAX; > > or we could do it that way, or it could be done the way it was originally > written. > > tbh it seems like a style choice, and whoever wrote it originally may have > preferred it being expressed that way. I can understand that you prefer it > be expressed this way - but it's not actually any better or more readable, is > it? Certainly the compiler is going to turn any variation we can come up > with into the same instructions. >
Oh, I guess I should've said "make this code shorter" or something :) We end up preferring ternary in llvm whenever possible, and I just followed what was used there. I largely agree it's a stylistic choice, FWIW. -- Davide _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
