[haiku-commits] Re: r40726 - haiku/trunk/src/kits/support
- From: "Jonas Sundström" <jonas@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "haiku-commits@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <haiku-commits@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 03:41:08 +0100
Stefano Ceccherini Stefano Ceccherini <stefano.ceccherini@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
...
> > > Changeset: http://dev.haiku-os.org/changeset/40726
...
> > > + bytes = bytes < 0 ? 0 : bytes;
> >
> > This clamps a negative return value to zero.
> >
>
> There is a private static method in BString to do that.
Yes:
// returns minimum of two given values (but clamps to 0):
static inline int32
min_clamp0(int32 num1, int32 num2)
{
if (num1 < num2)
return num1 > 0 ? num1 : 0;
return num2 > 0 ? num2 : 0;
}
I think bytes = bytes < 0 ? 0 : bytes;
is more clear than bytes = min_clamp0(bytes, bytes);
A positive 'bytes' is meant to be kept, and zero only assigned in case
of a negative return due to a vsnprintf() output error.
The BString buffer is unlocked using 'bytes'. I think that in case of
error, it's better to have it truncate, UnlockBuffer(0), than to have
UnlockBuffer(negative) run strlen(fPrivateData) on the failed output
of vsnprintf().
Is the use of min_clamp0() preferred in this case?
File scope uniformity?
/Jonas.
Other related posts:
