At Thu, 6 Nov 2008 10:49:06 +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
On Wed, Nov 05, 2008 at 09:35:01PM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
Mark Brown wrote:
return score;
- return 0xffffffff;
-1 would be simpler and safer (for possible missing f's).
I'm not sure that'd add to the clarity - the goal isn't to have all bits set, the goal is to have a much larger score than could ever otherwise be achieved so putting in a very large constant expresses that much more directly.
Also, regarding unsigned integer:
+unsigned get_score(int adc, int adc_l, int adc_h, int need_adc,
int dac, int dac_l, int dac_h, int need_dac)+{
- if ((adc >= adc_l) && (adc <= adc_h) &&
(dac >= dac_l) && (dac <= dac_h)) {unsigned diff_adc = need_adc - adc;unsigned diff_dac = need_dac - dac;unsigned score;if (((int)diff_adc) < 0)diff_adc = -diff_adc;if (((int)diff_dac) < 0)diff_dac = -diff_dac;score = diff_adc + diff_dac;return score;
It's more readable when diff_adc, diff_dac are int so that you have no ugly cast: int diff_adc = need_adc - adc; int diff_dac = need_dac - dac; unsigned score; if (diff_adc < 0) diff_adc = -diff_adc; if (diff_dac < 0) diff_dac = -diff_dac; score = diff_adc + diff_dac; return score;
And, even more readable with abs() (not surprisingly defined in linux/kernel.h): int diff_adc = need_adc - adc; int diff_dac = need_dac - dac; return abs(diff_adc) + abs(diff_dac);
Takashi