Re: Go ahead. Ask.

On 6/11/2010 9:26 AM, Seebs wrote:
I've removed the explanatory comment. I wrote the following patch.
There were Sound Technical Reasons.

@@ -347,7 +347,7 @@
break;
case 'l':
speed = strtod(optarg,&endp);
- if (speed<= 0 || *endp != '\0')
+ if (speed< 0 || !speed || *endp != '\0')
usage();
limit_rate = speed * 1024;
break;

So you've replaced "less than or equal to zero" with "less than zero or equal to zero"?

Given that this codes looks like a command-line argument parser, I can't imagine there is some nanosecond speed improvement requirement here. Short of a compiler bug, I can't think of anything.

Okay, you asked me to ask you. So, I'm asking you. What "Sound Technical Reasons" could there be for this?

--
Kenneth Brody
.