After asking in the IRC channel, all the people thought like me.
Both are correct, and the fork-switch is a very common idiom,
which makes easier to see what is the objective of the code, so
I will not apply this patch.
Regards,
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 09:20:34AM +0200, Roberto E. Vargas Caballero wrote:
> I don't understand this patch. The switch-fork is a common idiom
> and I don't know why you think it should be changed.
It separates the case when fork fails and when fork succeeds. You can
even move error-processing c
I don't understand this patch. The switch-fork is a common idiom
and I don't know why you think it should be changed.
Regards,
---
st.c | 11 ---
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/st.c b/st.c
index c48132a..df79e93 100644
--- a/st.c
+++ b/st.c
@@ -1257,11 +1257,10 @@ ttynew(void) {
if(openpty(&m, &s, NULL, NULL, &w) < 0)
die("openpty failed: %s\n", strerror(errno
