From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 443E320A26 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2017 11:26:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751903AbdITL04 (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Sep 2017 07:26:56 -0400 Received: from mail-pf0-f182.google.com ([209.85.192.182]:56135 "EHLO mail-pf0-f182.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751585AbdITL0y (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Sep 2017 07:26:54 -0400 Received: by mail-pf0-f182.google.com with SMTP id r71so1372087pfe.12 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2017 04:26:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:from:to:cc:references:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=pEUIYYrXzFCrDmDpP8keWDjhFcDWjsWfU/a33UsKolU=; b=br7n4xldgI3eXCNtDxKlmy57AgyBD0h356pZCVjd0sQ/rSPwEzUPKRw/VPDnwTb2nV hz9BfhzShOR/yUCi9q4UUgtMZXwUj9ZgifZ/Dvj/6AKmrLO65zGq/y0CEqh+atDhvyea ZajrifrTt4wWvrkc4T/ELeTXjeaYPU1VJgZ7YKzZ03r0dcQeWIx93bUYeODIII594i0k mIsmE/A4rk4tK4iY0HUBUxVFkcewNrpabi+CB0ML+cVdK9rcbiaIjWSkwfjER1SjtIFA yoPx+RSHphURSVkt4bDruScA/YyX3RNwLXLKDvULfqNQK8YvsyfqPmj22XqrwcuQGTuh 8gDQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:from:to:cc:references:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=pEUIYYrXzFCrDmDpP8keWDjhFcDWjsWfU/a33UsKolU=; b=sw9UBWJLVF+68Pd9Pc+Pf+lmn5P21PEp9lXlfqniI5fxoeKIi5O/Y4EzGFWoEBHnNf puhSpKaRqIFW2xUrNPTwb29wsex/JWrvkFVx6Xkxkr6Ugp6rAPGVDPOAP9T4POi3T5CK ccgd9v4ZFuylhq78YpdeH5aYhrOAm4CBELv6X8+c0+J5/DI+xn3Hr/69kV9YyXng01Q2 jERsEdapCnQR6u5X+LLD94loZTatyLspxnDr+bVqhMMiWWnjsaqXHR67B0YN4muYAZpH oW1OYw9KBldcpHw4LquGaYH4G96K0VXkyvZMZgANSs2rn63MqQEkdQFI2UfPD0xU/Nw2 vyTQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUibGK06CzEKOb1frpk8+15IH8dkfrn+SQIRJwaksd326ngFADry ZREsZAvKDzAe0VDmpWL0mvEPiTa6 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QCTRW5+eVWKdvt3QZI8QELXepDEp7neZO9FVybpEaSWAs9CpKTUW7Ccf+TlaZmNhd4v5Wc53A== X-Received: by 10.101.72.5 with SMTP id h5mr1880270pgs.305.1505906813527; Wed, 20 Sep 2017 04:26:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.4.2.238] ([14.102.72.146]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z24sm7690111pfk.3.2017.09.20.04.26.50 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 20 Sep 2017 04:26:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/5] builtin/checkout: avoid usage of '!!' From: Kaartic Sivaraam To: Junio C Hamano Cc: git@vger.kernel.org References: <20170919071525.9404-1-kaarticsivaraam91196@gmail.com> <20170919071525.9404-2-kaarticsivaraam91196@gmail.com> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 16:56:48 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-Cyberoam-smtpxy-version: 1.0.6.3 X-Cyberoam-AV-Policy: default X-CTCH-Error: Unable to connect local ctasd Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Wait, I missed a contradiction here. On Wednesday 20 September 2017 09:30 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > ....  And !!ptr is a shorter and more established way than ptr > != NULL to turn non-NULL ness into an int boolean, Documentation/SubmittingPatches says: >  - Some clever tricks, like using the !! operator with arithmetic >    constructs, can be extremely confusing to others. If !!ptr is a **more established way** to then why should it confuse others. Of course, !!ptr was stated as an "exception-rule" where ptr is a pointer (possibly NULL). That makes me wonder in what case is it "confusing" at all? --- Kaartic