A matter of curiosity concernin "good()"

Article View: gnu.g++.lib.bug

Article #152

#152

From: Jesper Joergensen [ris]
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 1989 14:13

22 lines
1022 bytes

To:   Doug Lea (GNU libg++ mailing list)

From: Jesper Jorgensen
      Department of Computer Science
      Technical University of Denmark

  Thanks for your very quick response (I really didn't expect it so soon),
  now I know what conventions I have to follow. However, as far as I can see
  there is no reason for making the construction:

    if (good()) { while (get(ch)) { ... } ... }

  since "get(ch)" tests for "good()" the following should be sufficient:

    while (get(ch)) { ... }

  Just for reasons of effeciency, then I won't bother you anymore.

   -JJ

Technical Details

Message-ID: <8910171213.AA26865@idris.id.dk>

Path:

arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!uwm.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!idris.id.dk!jj

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!uwm.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!idris.id.dk!jj
From: jj@idris.id.dk (Jesper Joergensen [ris])
Newsgroups: gnu.g++.lib.bug
Subject: A matter of curiosity concernin "good()"
Message-ID: <8910171213.AA26865@idris.id.dk>
Date: 17 Oct 89 14:13:42 GMT
Sender: daemon@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu
Distribution: gnu
Organization: GNUs Not Usenet
Lines: 22