Re: [PATCH v2] glib/gpoll: Remove if conditional



Patches are best attached to bugzilla. You can use "git-bz" to file the bug and attach your path directly 
there.

Don't hesitate to reply if you have trouble filing the bug or attaching the patch.

Cheers

On 26 Jul 2017, at 22:16, Alistair Francis <alistair23 gmail com> wrote:

On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Alistair Francis
<alistair francis xilinx com> wrote:
The original ready < nhandles - 1 can be re-written as ready + 1 < nhandles
which is the same confition that we are checking on the first
itteration of the for loop. This means we can remove the if statement
and let the for loop check the code.

This also has the side effect of removing an invalid check as
WAIT_OBJECT_0 was not subtracted from ready in the if statement.

Signed-off-by: Alistair Francis <alistair francis xilinx com>

Ping!

---
v2:
- Rebase on master
- Remove the first patch in the series as it was incorrect

glib/gpoll.c | 5 ++---
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/glib/gpoll.c b/glib/gpoll.c
index 265cb9210..b6c83d8ed 100644
--- a/glib/gpoll.c
+++ b/glib/gpoll.c
@@ -235,9 +235,8 @@ poll_rest (gboolean  poll_msgs,
       {
         /* Remove the handle that fired */
         int i;
-         if (ready < nhandles - 1)
-           for (i = ready - WAIT_OBJECT_0 + 1; i < nhandles; i++)
-             handles[i-1] = handles[i];
+         for (i = ready - WAIT_OBJECT_0 + 1; i < nhandles; i++)
+           handles[i-1] = handles[i];
         nhandles--;
         recursed_result = poll_rest (FALSE, handles, nhandles, fds, nfds, 0);
         return (recursed_result == -1) ? -1 : 1 + recursed_result;
--
2.11.0

_______________________________________________
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-devel-list gnome org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]