Hi.

On Monday 30 January 2006 19:49, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> >> How about nr==0, it would make it more obvious.
> >
> > I am inclined to agree. `!nr' seems to imply some sort of an error
> > condition;
>
> ! seems to imply a boolean usually. (If this was Java, this would even
> be enforced.)

If this was Java! Thank goodness it's not :>

Nigel

> However, !x (and x) is scattered all around the kernel where
> x==0,x!=0 (or x==NULL,x!=NULL) would be more readable.
>
> > perhaps a comment could be placed in order to make why the case of (nr ==
> > 0) is being ignored.
> >
> > - Yuki.
>
> Jan Engelhardt