Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: Read errors
Re: Read errors
From: Linus Nielsen Feltzing <linus_at_haxx.se>
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 20:42:23 +0100
Mike Holden wrote:
> Maybe a better construct would be to define 2 macros, called success() and
> failure() which do a bit of hidden "magic" to make the code more readable.
Absolutely not! That kind of "hidden magic" is against everything my
coding philosophy stands for. I want things visible in the code. Keep It
> That way you can write "if (success(somefunction()))", which is way more
> readable than "if(somefunction())" where somefunction() returns 0 for
I don't agree. I think the latter is way more readable, because it shows
what is going on, instead of hiding it in a hard-to-debug macro.
A simple comment may be in place, however.
Received on 2003-03-13