Re: [PATCH] Really *do* nothing in while loop
- From
- jdow <jdow@earthlink.net>
- Date
- May 8, 2005, 11:33 UTC
- Message-ID
- <12e801c553c1$c454ea20$1225a8c0@kittycat>
- In-Reply-To
- <1115551204.3085.0.camel@kryten>
From: "James Purser" <purserj@ksit.dynalias.com>
Show 19 quoted lines
> On Sun, 2005-05-08 at 19:48, Michael Tokarev wrote: > > Thomas Glanzmann wrote: > > > [PATCH] Really *do* nothing in while loop > > > > > > Signed-Off-by: Thomas Glanzmann <sithglan@stud.uni-erlangen.de> > > > > > > --- a/sha1_file.c > > > +++ b/sha1_file.c > > > @@ -335,7 +335,7 @@ > > > stream.next_in = hdr; > > > stream.avail_in = hdrlen; > > > while (deflate(&stream, 0) == Z_OK) > > > - /* nothing */ > > > + /* nothing */; > > > > > > /* Then the data itself.. */ > > > stream.next_in = buf; > > > > Well, the lack of semicolon is wrong really (and funny).
You guys REALLY do not see the changed semantics here? You are
changing:
while (deflate(&stream, 0) == Z_OK)
stream.next_in = buf;into
while (deflate(&stream, 0) == Z_OK)
;
/* Then the data itself.. */
stream.next_in = buf;I suspect the results of that tiny bit of code would be slightly different, especially if "stream.next_in" is volatile, "buf" is volatile, or if the assignment to next_in has an effect on the "deflate" operation.
{^_^}