Re: [AD] C99 isms in test.c

[Elias Pschernig <elias@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2005-10-25 at 11:16 +0200, David Schwingenschlögl wrote:   
> While I don't want to argue about the relevance of this piece of code, 

Well, the only function of the code is to be timed, it has no other
relevance (else Evert would have commented it, or else others would have
complained)..

> I'd rather like to suggest to comment on the changes. I don't know how 
> you guys handle commenting, but still, the x += and y+= lines of code do 
> not comment on themselves and were added with some assumptions about the 
> compiler in mind - something that would nicely go along with something 
> like "Both x and y have to be changed so that a clever optimizer does 
> not optimize away z".
> 
> Just my two cents ;-)
> 

..but I agree, a comment wouldn't hurt even in this case :)

-- 
Elias Pschernig