From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2817 invoked by alias); 1 Mar 2011 21:46:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 2809 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Mar 2011 21:46:20 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 21:46:12 +0000 Received: (qmail 23634 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 21:46:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO scottsdale.localnet) (pedro@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 1 Mar 2011 21:46:10 -0000 From: Pedro Alves To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [commit] py-prettyprint.c, val may be null Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 21:46:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.35-25-generic; KDE/4.6.0; x86_64; ; ) Cc: Michael Snyder References: <4D6D5F71.5040802@vmware.com> <201103012124.33473.pedro@codesourcery.com> <4D6D67E8.9040402@vmware.com> In-Reply-To: <4D6D67E8.9040402@vmware.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201103012146.10195.pedro@codesourcery.com> 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: 2011-03/txt/msg00054.txt.bz2 On Tuesday 01 March 2011 21:40:56, Michael Snyder wrote: > In that case, the later check for null is superfluous. > Is this better? Yes, I think so. -- Pedro Alves