Horton

Re: strange case of "if ((a & b))"

Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2021-08-19T07:34:35Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
> On 19 Aug 2021, at 05:08, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> 
> Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 4:29 AM Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> wrote:
>>> -       state->oneCol = (origTupdesc->natts == 1) ? true : false;
>>> +       state->oneCol = origTupdesc->natts == 1;
> 
> FWIW, I am definitely not a fan of removing the parentheses in this
> context, because readers might wonder if you meant an "a = b = 1"
> multiple-assignment, or even misread it as that and be confused.
> So I'd prefer
> 
>          state->oneCol = (origTupdesc->natts == 1);

+1, the parenthesis makes it a lot more readable IMO.

--
Daniel Gustafsson		https://vmware.com/

Commits

  1. Clean up more code using "(expr) ? true : false"

  2. Clean up some code using "(expr) ? true : false"