From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12523 invoked by alias); 29 Jan 2008 03:42:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 12514 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Jan 2008 03:42:34 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (216.239.45.13) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 03:42:17 +0000 Received: from zps18.corp.google.com (zps18.corp.google.com [172.25.146.18]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id m0T3gDd6009597 for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 19:42:13 -0800 Received: from localhost (ruffy.corp.google.com [172.18.118.116]) by zps18.corp.google.com with ESMTP id m0T3gCcY028942 for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 19:42:13 -0800 Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 67641) id D1CDF1C72AA; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 19:42:12 -0800 (PST) To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: [RFC] ||/&& placement Message-Id: <20080129034212.D1CDF1C72AA@localhost> Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 04:18:00 -0000 From: dje@google.com (Doug Evans) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-01/txt/msg00663.txt.bz2 Hi. Do changes like the following fall under the "obvious" rule? [One might want to fold the && plus its next line into one line - I think it's reasonable, but it's orthogonal to the question I'm asking here.] 2008-01-28 Doug Evans * typeprint.c (whatis_exp): Fix formatting. Index: typeprint.c =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/typeprint.c,v retrieving revision 1.30 diff -u -p -u -p -r1.30 typeprint.c --- typeprint.c 1 Jan 2008 22:53:13 -0000 1.30 +++ typeprint.c 29 Jan 2008 03:38:10 -0000 @@ -133,8 +133,8 @@ whatis_exp (char *exp, int show) if (objectprint) { - if (((TYPE_CODE (type) == TYPE_CODE_PTR) || - (TYPE_CODE (type) == TYPE_CODE_REF)) + if (((TYPE_CODE (type) == TYPE_CODE_PTR) + || (TYPE_CODE (type) == TYPE_CODE_REF)) && (TYPE_CODE (TYPE_TARGET_TYPE (type)) == TYPE_CODE_CLASS)) {