Wireshark-commits: [Wireshark-commits] master 19c0b8b: Don't use "== {TRUE, FALSE}" when testing wh
URL: https://code.wireshark.org/review/gitweb?p=wireshark.git;a=commit;h=19c0b8bbfd9712ff3182a119f5daeac33a7732d5
Submitter: Guy Harris (guy@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
Changed: branch: master
Repository: wireshark
Commits:
19c0b8b by Guy Harris (guy@xxxxxxxxxxxx):
Don't use "== {TRUE,FALSE}" when testing whether a Boolean is true or false.
"if (boolean)" suffices to test for true, and "if (!boolean)" suffices
to test for false.
Most of the time, explicitly comparing against TRUE or FALSE is
harmless, although possibly slightly less efficient, as you're
explicitly testing against 1 rather than testing for "not zero".
*However*, if you want to test whether a given bit is set in a flags
field, "if ((flags & flagbit) == TRUE)" *DOES NOT WORK* unless "flagbit"
is equal to 1, because TRUE is equal to 1, and if "flagbit" is not equal
to 1, "flags & flagbit" will *NEVER* be equal to 1.
So comparing "== TRUE" is a bad habit to get into, as it might lead to
its use when doing bit testing.
While we're at it, clean up some other tests:
"if (!(x == FALSE))" really means "x is true", so write it as
such, i.e. "if (x)";
if (a && b)
do this;
if (a && !b)
do that;
reads better as
if (a) {
if (b)
do this
else
do that
}
when doing bit testing, there's no need to shift the bit, just
test it (and, no, that doesn't conflict with the bit about TRUE
being 1 - *just test the bit*, it's the standard C idiom).
Fixes CID 1362119.
Change-Id: I011154caae45307796ffd270d265c05a2533b1db
Reviewed-on: https://code.wireshark.org/review/15585
Reviewed-by: Guy Harris <guy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Actions performed:
from 1a5b05d Show the reserved fields in AAPL buffers.
adds 19c0b8b Don't use "== {TRUE,FALSE}" when testing whether a Boolean is true or false.
Summary of changes:
plugins/profinet/packet-dcerpc-pn-io.c | 58 +++++++++++++++++---------------
1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
