This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: assertify pdp11

From: Nathan Sidwell <nathan at codesourcery dot com>
To: Paul Koning <pkoning at equallogic dot com>
Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Mon, 09 May 2005 15:25:43 +0100
Subject: Re: assertify pdp11
References: <427F571C.1070200@codesourcery.com> <17023.28707.684000.226948@gargle.gargle.HOWL>

Paul Koning wrote:

! gcc_assert (!addr);

Is (!addr) what the coding conventions call for? I really dislike treating non-bool items as if they were bool, so I always write (addr != 0) as in the original.


Generally yes, but there's certainly more leeway in the target
files. If '(addr == 0)' makes you happy, then that's fine.

That "unreachable" looks like a not-yet-implemented case.  Will try to
check that out...

yeah, looked that way to me -- sorry I forgot to mention it in the email.

nathan
--
Nathan Sidwell    ::   http://www.codesourcery.com   ::     CodeSourcery LLC
nathan@codesourcery.com    ::     http://www.planetfall.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk

References:
- assertify pdp11
  - From: Nathan Sidwell
- Re: assertify pdp11
  - From: Paul Koning

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]