Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Tim Rentsch Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: Which side of bitwise OR is evaluated first? Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2021 00:24:05 -0700 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 28 Message-ID: <86eec58ga2.fsf@linuxsc.com> References: <8635vsj46u.fsf@linuxsc.com> <1bv98ox1ts.fsf@pfeifferfamily.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="52e1adecb53146628fb5ee5c083fc413"; logging-data="8554"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18QtMpP7BjTJpuR8KYWYgxyKbyIugYyyhw=" User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:BHqlmJ1BT8RbBwXDMTYArcLWLJs= sha1:8/8Q/PUtQ9hTvSozfm2eAtnObJA= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:161866 Joe Pfeiffer writes: > Tim Rentsch writes: > >> O?uz writes: >> >>> So, should I change this or is it good (except being a bit >>> unreadable)? >> >> Two comments. >> >> One, don't listen to the advice of "experts" who say something >> is or is not readable. Instead try writing the code several >> different ways and pick the one that best expresses what it >> is you want to say. > > Note that the OP himself described it as unreadable. I'd say any time > the author of the code regards it as unreadable, we should take him at > his word (for the record, I agree with him here). Obviously the code was not unreadable, since many people here were able to read it without too much difficulty. The author too was, rather obviously, able to read it. Some people might believe that some other, unspecified, people would have trouble reading the code, but that doesn't make it unreadable. If you were able to read the code then I don't know what you mean when you say the code is unreadable, but certainly you don't mean literally that.